Skip to main content

tv   U.S. House of Representatives  CSPAN  December 14, 2010 1:00pm-5:00pm EST

1:00 pm
to be fallingway? >> of course i can give him that assurance. of course it will be monitored and it will reflect the evidence that emerges from the polls that we have put in place a series of measures not merely to protect low-income graduates, which we have done through the threshold, but we have put in place a series of measures designed to help children from low-income family go to university notably by increasing the grants from the level which was under the previous governing to an extra half million people. >> i wonder if my friend can see the future of the position of english students relative to scottish and welsh students in the future? shouldn't we be looking to a degree of fairness between
1:01 pm
families of similar economic circumstances across the united kingdom in years to come? >> i believe the government believes in that. we -- scotland, wales and northern ireland has got to make their decision. but i think the inevitable consequences of the tightening of public finance which is happening under the government, which happens under any government, would bound to be that a system of graduate contributions will happen throughout the u.k. but that is for them to decide. right at the back. i'll take one right at the back. >> i thank the honorable member for giving way. can i point out that despite the talk of supporting people with low income, i find it quite hard to stomach hearing this because in my constituency, for example, the education maintenance grant,
1:02 pm
the majority of young people come from low-income backgrounds and we'll be losing that support. and across england, 88% of children benefit from this. if you take this one ethnic minority group and other children they will be prevented from going to higher education. we're still waiting to hear. >> before the state replies, a numerous number of members wish to speak in this debate. i want to accommodate. interventions must be brief. secretary of state. >> yes, of course, i hear what
1:03 pm
the honorable member says about the educational mention. what i have to say is the existing system was enormously wasteful. large numbers of people receive the e.m.a. who did not need it to stay at school. she is right by stressing there are large pocket of pockets in england and the east part of london. and the purpose of the pupele premium, which has been introduced in the school system, is to -- schools and pupils of -- >> well, i tend to -- >> i will take an intervention later. we've eliminated i think most of the -- although alternatives -- to raising funding for universities. i hope that nobody opposite is seriously arguing we should drastically reduce the number of students, that we should drastically reduce maintenance or we should withdraw funding from universities. the only practical alternative,
1:04 pm
the only practical alternative was to retrieve income for universities from high earning graduates, once they have left, and that is the policy that we are pursuing. and today 50 university vice chancellors from come forward and endorsed this approach to strengthening university funding in the long term. now, the members opposite -- the members opposite who are following these arguments closely argue -- we acknowledge, they say, that universities will continue to have high levels of income, but they say you're replacing public funding with private funding and that is in some sense ideological. it's a point i'd like to take on. at present, at present roughly 60% of the income of
1:05 pm
universities in different funding streams comes from the public sector. the rest comes from private sources. something the last government would try to encourage. it will be reversed in future -- in future -- in future. 40%, roughly of the university funding will come from the public sector and 60% from the private sector. and i'm keen to encourage more private funding of the university which is why i have spoken to the director general of the c.v.i. and he's approaching all those members in order to ensure that we have a significantly higher level of employer support for apprenticeships, for sandwich courses in other courses. >> there is far too much noise in the chamber.
1:06 pm
when the secretary says he's not giving way members must not continue standing. that's the situation. secretary of state. >> i hope there is not too many people opposite because we need more resources going into universities, not less. that is what we are given. >> under the bill introduced by the labour party, it had higher rates. one thing out there is universities may end up being allowed to charge [inaudible] what assurance, what rules can my friend guarantee that it will be exceptional and 6,000 will be the limit for most universities? >> yes, that is a personal
1:07 pm
question in light of the experience of the last government which had a two-tier system. there was a migration of all universities to the top of the range that operated in effect like a cartel. that must be stopped and not happen again. >> there are several ways this will happen. >> first of all, any university which wants to go beyond 6,000 will have to satisfy very demanding tests of access for low-income families, including the introduction of scholarships, new institutions, particularly f.e. colleges, providing accredited courses, will drive down the cost of high-quality basic teaching. and if necessary, if necessary, if universities defy the principle of operating on a competitive cost basis we may have to introduce additional measures to observely the [inaudible] >> order. order. order.
1:08 pm
i apologize, secretary of state. i must ask him to address the house. his natural courtesy -- i want the whole house to hear what he has to say. secretary. >> simply saying there are potentially other mechanisms -- there are other mechanisms by which universities will be required by which other universities which do exceed the 6,000 pound level will not be allowed to behave in the way they behaved under the last government. but let me just proceed. of course, increasing the graduate contribution is bound to have an effect, additional costs to graduate. i want to summarize the steps we are taking to make sure this happens in a fair and equitable way. first of all, first of all, no full-time student will pay upfront tuition fees. part-time students getting
1:09 pm
their first degree for the first time, unlike under the last government, for the first time will have the opportunity to obtain professional con-- concessional finance under the arrangements of the student loan keep, and yesterday i made a further announcement by discussing this with the universities and others that we will increase the range of that access from students who were originally proposed -- that we would further their time in part-time education to those spending a quarter of their time. this will widen enormously the number of part-time students who have access to supporting finance in order to pursue their education. thirdly -- thirdly, we will introduce a threshold for graduate repayment, 21,000, a significantly higher level than before, and it will be a rate
1:10 pm
annually in line with earnings. and i think it's important to emphasize that point because under the labour government there was a threshold, 15,000 pounds, it was never uprated on any basis whatsoever. and i wish to communicate what i said yesterday that in the future students under the current arrangements, the labour government arrangements -- i'd say 15,000 threshold, will in the future have annual uprating with inflation. these existing students in the last government did absolutely nothing to protect, will have inflation [inaudible] we, furthermore, furthermore, are introducing variable interest rates so those with high incomes pay relatively more to -- as a result of this,
1:11 pm
a 30,000-pound salary will carry a monthly payment of approximately 68 pounds which is incidentally far lower than would,ist under a graduate tax system because under that system people would start paying much earlier. >> not giving way at the moment -- must be allowed to continue his argument. >> in terms of the measures that we have taken to improve access to low-income families, the separate problem of low-income graduates, we made it very clear there will be additional grant provisions, as i made in response to an intervention earlier, and in addition, the offer requirement of universities wishing to move to a higher threshold will have demanding -- in response to
1:12 pm
access. if it's worth recalling -- if it's worth recalling, the situation we have inherited, there is a lot of crocodile tears opposite about low-income families. but let me just remind them, social mobility from disadvantaged backgrounds trying to get into russell group university has deteriorated over the last decade. we have at the moment 80,000 free school meals pupils of which only 40 -- 4-0, made it. 40,000 out of 80,000. that's less than some leading independent schools. that is a shameful inherentans. that is a shameful inheritance for those who complain about
1:13 pm
disadvantaged backgrounds and we intend to rectify. i will conclude with this -- i don't pretend, none of us pretend that this is an easy subject. of course it is. we have some very difficult choices. we could have -- we could have taken -- we could have taken easier options, but we are insistent that at the end of this we would be making a substantial -- >> point of order, mr. brian donahoe. >> not going to give way and why is he not? >> order. order. i understand what the honorable gentleman has said but that is not a point of order. it is a point of frustration. secretary gable.
1:14 pm
[chattering] >> i've given way to several of his colleagues, several of mine. i now wish to summarize where we are. if i can go back to what i was saying. there have been very difficult choices to make. we could have made a decision to drastically cut the number of university students. we could have cut student maintenance. we could have cut the funding to universities without reflecting it. but instead we have opted for a set of policies that provides a strong base for university funding which makes a major contribution to reducing the deficit and introducing a significantly more progressive system of payments. and i am proud to put forward that measure. >> order. order. order.
1:15 pm
order. order. i understand the passion. order. >> the more noise, the greater the delay. i want back benches to have the chance to contribute. i do -- order. order. i do appeal to honorable and right honorable members to help me to help them. the question is motion three on the order paper. mr. john denham. three named questions relating to the evidence under pending government policy. in particular regarding to what studies the government commissioned about the potential impact of these high fees of participation, on longer courses which is languages, medicine, law, architecture, on the postcombrad wit teaching
1:16 pm
courses. they were due to answer at noon today and there has been none. mr. speaker, what can the house do to ensure the government informs -- which vital information so that we can properly have debates like this on subjects that are of interest to the whole nation? >> those in favor to parliamentary replies -- the gentleman must pursue these matters through the table office and in other ways. we cannot be detained now by what he has just said. the question is motion three on the order paper. mr. john denham. >> mr. speaker, i note that the prime minister and the deputy prime minister have already walked out on this debate. and it's a shame that the two architects of this policy, they don't have the courtesy to stay and listen to both sides of the debate.
1:17 pm
now, mr. speaker, i fear i have to lower the expectations on my colleagues on the opposition benches today because those of my colleagues who have come here expecting some good party political knockabouts about u-turns, about broken policies, about fees that were described by the deputy prime minister which he said was a disaster and now believes in the policy, i am not going to do that speech. so much of the media coverage -- sotcht media coverage of this issue has been dominated by the liberal democrats that we could be forgiven of thinking that today's debate about is about the future of the liberal democrats. it's not about the future of the liberal democrats. it's about something much more important than that. mr. speaker, there are millions of parents and millions of future students who don't care about the liberal democrats but they do care about the huge fee
1:18 pm
increase we are being asked to decide today. and today's decision must be taken on the facts and on its merits. we do note that if this torrid measure goes through with the support or extension of liberal democrats that party will forfeit the right to call themselves a progressive political party. but we also know, mr. speaker, that this house can stop the decision today. the deputy leader of the liberal democrats said he cannot support the government. as well he might because his local university will get its funding cuts on 38 million pounds to three million pounds a year. as already said, if it wishes to charge the full 9,000 pound tuition fee. the leader of the liberal democrats said he may vote against the government. and i say to him and others, if he and every member of this house, not just in the liberal
1:19 pm
democrats, but the conservatives and labour party and others, vote against it today it will fall. so let me -- let me set out why they should vote against, all votes for a delay and vote for a repeat and not to obtain -- i give way to my friend. >> i have got petition from the university of warrick for 240 leading academics in this country object to the measures [inaudible] and more importantly, calling for an inquiry about the future of education. what does my honorable friend think about that? >> well, not only, mr. speaker, is there widespread dis-- [inaudible] in the university, but they referred to the letter from the university of the u.k. but did
1:20 pm
not read it out. and the reason he did not read it it out is it makes it absolutely clear that university u.k. opposed the cuts in higher education funding upon which the fee increase is based. the fact that he's persuaded by chance lors with a gun to his head, that this money is going, so this is the only option in time hardly speaks of him persuading the university to the policy. mr. speaker, you yourself said last night that votes technically today is on a narrow issue. but behind it is the most profound change in university funding since the university grants committee was set up in the 1920's. it is the ending of funding for most university degrees. it is a huge burden of debt on graduates. it is an untried, untested and unstable market for students. although there is always room for improvement, england enjoys a world-class university
1:21 pm
system. world class in research. a disproportionate number of the best universities. a richness and diversity of higher education to compare with the rest. the risks are so high, the consequences are unclear that no sane person would rush it through without proper debate or discussion. but today we don't even have the paper that tells us how it's meant to work. i give way to representative of one of those leading research universities. >> i thank the honorable gentleman for giving way. when he talks about fundamental changes, will he talk about his party who voted to introduce fees ands broke the principle of free education? that is a fundamental change. he voted for it. he voted for hypocrisy. will he apologize? >> it was, mr. speaker, because of the 2001 labour manifesto
1:22 pm
that we in short, and i was about venture at the time, but with my right honorable friend who is a minister, that that policy did not come into force until there had been a further general election. that is not what is being proposed by the coalition today. now, mr. speaker, i'm sorry that the prime minister left because the prime minister did his bit yesterday to run down our english universities. what did he say about our universities? he said they were unsustainable, uncompetitive and unfair. he didn't say they were world class. he didn't praise what they had achieved. he could only knock them. well, uncompetitive, the second most popular destination for overseas students in the world, the prime minister tells the world they're not competitive. well, that does a great deal of help to our universities. mind you the prime minister has some interesting thoughts about overseas students. when he was in china he said --
1:23 pm
he said to the chinese students, we won't increase the fees for overseas students because in the past we've been pushing up the fees on overseas students and using that as a way to keeping them down on our domestic students. so we have done the thing in our government which is to put up contributions from british students so foreign students, we should be able to keep that growth under control. so now we know why the prime minister was to push these contributions up, to keep down the price of chinese students. extraordinary. now, mr. speaker, the prime minister yesterday said -- one moment. the prime minister said yesterday that current model of higher education funding is not providing enough money. he quote the brand review that public funding for student is lower in real terms than 20 years ago. we are bound to ask -- how the hell did that happen? because that didn't has under
1:24 pm
labour. and i can tell the prime minister how it happened. between 1989 and 1997 under the last two governments, public funding for students fell by by 36% in real terms. and who was the special advisor to the conservative chancellor at that time? the prime minister was. if the prime minister wants to know whose fault it was he needs to look in the mirror in the morning. he was cussing university funding then. he is cussing university funding now. this is a torrid funding of cutting higher education. only unfortunately this time they have liberal democrats to take it through with them. i give way to my friend. >> i thank my rightful friend for giving way. why do you think this government is so intent on destroying the human base in this country? this is one of the leading areas of research and experts and they are withdrawing public funding on it.
1:25 pm
what do you think they have against it? >> well -- knuckleball who me to try to get inside the heads of the opposite. if you read what they say, they say these things have no value unless they have a value in the marketplace. it is purely and simply that. i give way to the honorable lady. >> i'm most grateful. the last -- the governor was in government, only 40,000 students went home -- free school meals went to offset cambridge. does he not think it would mean less sorblete and those paying a higher amount back? >> no, i don't, mr. speaker. if the honorable lady will forgive me. i'll come to that point in a
1:26 pm
few minutes. because of the prime minister's policies, we in this country will stand alone with romania as the only country in the oecd casting our environment -- cutting our investment in higher education. but yesterday's speech by the prime minister, which is a defense of these policies, is he does not understand the most basic features of the policy he's putting forward. these fee increases are not designed to raise extra money for universities. that was labour ski. that was our scheme. -- that was labour scheme. that was our scheme. it came on top of university income and it enabled more students to go to better funded universities. the prime minister's plan, put forward by the business secretary, is totally different. it is to simply reduce the 80% cut in the funding of university teaching, not to raise extra money.
1:27 pm
most graduates will be asked not to pay something towards their education but to pay the entire cost of their university education. universities will have to charge 7,000 to 8,000 pounds simply to replace the money they lose. and many universities will lose 90% of their public funding. that is what is at stake today. if this fee increase goes through, english students and graduates will face the highest fees of any public university system anywhere in the developed world. higher than france. higher than germany. higher, yes, than the united states of america. i give way. >> i thank jat for giving way. will he agree that anyone earning less than 25,000 will pay less than a one pound for their university education? that is on the standard --
1:28 pm
>> that is on the handout. i will say to the other gentleman -- i must answer the question. i say to the honorable gentleman, he may not realize that 21,000 pounds is in 2016 when it will be worth in real terms precisely what our threshold was worth when we brought it in. now, mr. speaker -- most graduates will be paying off their debt for 30 years. the average is 11 years under the current scheme. the children of these graduates will have started university before they paid off their own fees. and as i will show you, mr. speaker, the payment system is not fair. i give way to my honorable friend. >> would my honorable friend accept that reducing access and increasing relative price to our competitors will reduce the productivity and tax -- will undermine economic growth and what we should be doing is making the bankers pay their
1:29 pm
levy rather than giving it back in corporation tax and invest that money in higher education for the economic growth of this country? >> what we certainly need, mr. speaker, to abstain investment in higher education. you don't actually need to adopt our actual macroeconomic policies to know that this government could have made a different choice even now. because there is no -- in a moment. there is no other country in the world taking the steps that we are taking. and no other country in the party can understand why we are doing it. and as always, rather than defend their decision, we get the pathetic answer, we have no choice. but, mr. speaker, they did have a choice. everyone knows they had a choice. we on this side gave more measures than the responsible approach to deficit reduction. but -- but even on their own
1:30 pm
terms, if the coalition had cut higher education in line with the rest of public services, we would have been looking at fee increases of a few hundred pounds. he said to us today, should it be 10%? it should be 20%. i say you are not talking about not to 4,000 pounds, not to 6,000, 7,000. i give way to the gentleman. >> the right honorable gentleman can't get away from the fact that most independent experts agree that the graduate tax, which seems to be the policy of the party opposite, will make students worse off because they'll have to pay back more debt and pay it back earlier. why doesn't the honorable gentleman address that fundamental point? >> let's be quite -- let's be quite straightforward about this. there are two stages of this process. the first is to decide how much
1:31 pm
money will be public fee funded and how much money needs to come from graduates. the second stage is how you get the graduate to make the contribution. the first stage is the critical one here today because it is the 80% cut in university education. that is forcing the graduate contribution so high. on the second point -- on the second point of how graduates make their contributions, if the honorable gentleman will bear with me, as the lady did -- i need to make some progress because i am coming into the concerns of many in this house. the gentleman says he doesn't have any money in his budget. his budget is cut by more than anybody else. they as a government didn't have to do this. and the truth, mr. speaker, in
1:32 pm
the long run it will almost certainly cost the taxpayer more. because what's their plan? i say this. every year they are going to borrow 10 billion pounds to fund student loans and every year they're going going to write off three billion pounds of the 10 billion pounds they just borrowed because they can't collect the loans. that's as much money they're cutting from the university teaching. but the institutes of fiscal study said, as the london economics have said, the government has almost certainly underestimated how much debt they'll have to write off because students are borrowing more and borrowing it for london -- for longer. so students -- for longer. so students, saddled with debt, will be worse off. the universities' cut will be worse off. the taxpayer will be worse off. if it wasn't so serious it would be comical. so let's look at the
1:33 pm
government's fiscal -- i give way to the honorable gentleman who is the higher education spokesman for his party. >> i thank jat for giving way. perhaps he could enlighten us. when he was in cabinet up until may of last year, when his successor had a billion pounds worth of cuts, did he support it or speak against it? >> it's a very -- it's a very interesting thing. half the time -- i am going to answer the question. no. no. i am going to answer the question. half the time we're told, you never had a plan for dealing with the deficit. and then half the time they said, this is what you were going to do to deal with the deficit. they can't have it both ways. the truth is, mr. speaker, as i have said on many occasions since it was published, no
1:34 pm
higher education budget would have been unscathed under our deficit reduction program. no, it wouldn't. but it wouldn't have been cut by 80%. to 6,000 or 9,000 pounds. i want to make some progress, mr. speaker, on the issue of fairness, because that is i think at the heart of many of the arguments made by the government and questions are being raised on all sides of the house. they say that it is better for low-income graduates. the deputy prime minister said it. the bottom 25% of earners will pay much less in their contributions for their university education than they do at the moment. the prime minister said it yesterday. with our new system, the poorest quarter of graduates will pay back less overall than they do currently. the poorer will pay less. the rich will pay more. we had a parade of constant stricten ministers saying they have to hang on to their ministerial office. they have to keep their red boxes and their cards because
1:35 pm
this is really such a good deal for low-income graduates. they will all be better off, they say. you know, when i heard the prime minister say yesterday that high fees would be drubbling, i said i heard that voice somewhere. i couldn't place it at first. last night i remembered, -- it's on daytime television. if you have bad debt, court judgments, let us wrap them up in one payment and have one monthly payment. we all know what's wrong with thosed a verts. they charge you higher rates of interest and you end up paying much more. it's exactly what the prime minister is proposing today. so we all know -- we all know what's wrong with the prime minister's saying, let's see what the government claims. now i have to say -- in a moment -- i have to say that we on this side don't accept the power the government makes between their team and ours.
1:36 pm
we think they've chosen the assumption between their scheme and the current scheme. they think -- we think they've chosen their assumption to produce it -- a lot of people don't realize that 15,000 threshold in 2006 is the same as the 21,000 that will start in the 2016. let's look, nonetheless, at the government's own figures. they say a graduate from the bottom 10% will pay less. but how much less? what is the change that led the deputy prime minister, the prime minister, many ministers to say that is so fair, so wonderful? i'll tell you, the house, on the government's own dodgey figures, the poorest 10% of graduates will pay just 88 pounds less a year on average. one pound 50 a year. that's right.
1:37 pm
88 pounds. now, every little helps. but the ministers sell their consciouses for just 88 pounds a year is a tragedy because if the government's real aid is to ease the pressure on the lowest paid graduates i will support that. they will only need to make changes to the current scheme to achieve that aid. there is nothing about that tiny benefit to the lowest income graduates that justifies doubling or tripling the debt of the vast majority of graduates. and the i.f.s. said yesterday that graduates from the 30% of poorest households will pay more. and the heaviest burden, the hardest hit in terms of how much of their earnings they'll pay over the coming years will
1:38 pm
hit the average graduate, they get hit hardest. they will get hit harder than the graduates going not highest paid jobs. that's what the london economics says. i tell you what, that's what something else says that the house might wish to listen to. david was the higher education spokesman of the liberal democrats. the member for newbury. in an email that i have received, he said to a number of his colleagues the following -- there are those who are claiming that the current proposals are progressives. but this is only the case if by progressive you mean richer graduates will pay more than poorer graduates because for all the middle and higher earning graduates over the lifetime the more they earn the less they pay. it's a large part of the justification of charging fees, it's the higher lifetime earnings of graduates a scheme in which graduates with large
1:39 pm
lifetime earnings pay less than graduates with comparatively small lifetime earnings cannot be regarded as either progressive or fair. in this regard, says the former higher education spokesman from the liberal democrats, the new proposals, because they include the real terms, interest charges, are more regressive than labour schemes. i give way to the honorable gentleman who have caught my eye for sometime. >> i thank gentleman for his kindness in making a substantial spending commitment. can he tell the house how much? >> i don't think the honorable gentleman has been listening. mr. speaker, it is because -- it is the average graduate
1:40 pm
going to the typical job who gets hit hardest compared to the highest earning graduates that we need a fairer system of graduate contribution in the years to come. but, mr. -- i give way on this point. >> i'm grateful to the gentleman giving way. he won't accept the comparisons between the existing scheme and the government's proposal. but will he accept the i.f.s.'s analysis of the same, that the system proposed is more progressive than the current scheme and more progressive than the [inaudible] ? >> no. the i.s.f. -- the graduates from the poorest 30% of households will pay more. and clearly at all other levels people pay more than they will do over the current scheme. mr. speaker, i must make some progress. fairest can be judged by how much graduates pay. it must be measured, too, by the chance of becoming a
1:41 pm
graduate at all. over the past few years, the poorest students have steadily increased. there is much more to be done. and even more to be done, as my right honorable friend has shown this week in access to the most brilliant universities. but the progress we have made was not an accident. it took great efforts by majority of universities and we constructed the support, the roots of opportunity for more and more of those bright, talented young people. all that's been kicked away. >> thank you. it's exactly the point the secretary of state made. there seffed that the poorest children are not going to the best universities. and that remains a problem. and the concern for many of us on this aisle, some of us on this side, certainly, by increasing fees even further there will be less money to go to the best universities.
1:42 pm
>> i'm very sorry that the secretary of state did not give way to the honorable gentleman because i think anybody who is showing the integrity and courage that he is in being critical of his party deserves to hear from people on his side. in his remarks, the honorable gentleman is in some very good company, as i will show in a moment. now, mr. speaker, we created ladders of opportunity for people from low-income backgrounds which are now being knocked over. the higher education minister was asked in a parliamentary question. he said evidence from colleges, schools and academies shows that involvement in the activities provided through aim
1:43 pm
higher was associated with higher than predicted attainment of gcse and greater confidence among learners that they were able to achieve. greater confidence among learners that they were able to achieve. so what does the higher education minister doing? he's closing it down. >> i thank my friend for giving way. they gave 30 million pounds into participation. aim higher is gone. the rest of that money is not yet concerned by the new government. if that goes, does that not mean that the 150 million pounds made available [inaudible] in terms of wide impact [inaudible] >> my honorable friend is absolutely right. the scheme, which i'll come to in a moment, which happened this weekend, is thwarted by the scale in the higher education budget.
1:44 pm
it's a loan dwarfed by the cuts in about four weeks from now of jeeksal maintenance awards which will stop -- educational maintenance awards which will stop young people going to college this january. e.m.a.'s have -- just getting young people to universities. many young people have been able to succeed going into higher education, getting better jobs or enjoying a number of apprenticeships. the e.m.a.'s are making aim to make a difference in the university. the whole house knows the work. i don't think there is' anyone outside the -- there's anyone outside the jeanl establishment that will -- educational establishment that will provide more money for people in low-income homes.
1:45 pm
now he says there is no doubt that such a significant increase in costs will be for those in nonprivileged backgrounds. the double whammy for state cuts in funding of higher fees is inequitable and is free to freeze -- sure to freeze fees. i hope members will think on that. now, mr. speaker, over the weekend -- i give way to my honorable friend. >> i thank my right honorable friend for giving way. my constituency is located in the fifth most -- it's the 19th most deprived in england. and we've seen the participation rates of people getting a higher education from 1997 to last year increase by over 80%. how can these proposals do anything other than to bring that figure down and to deter people from poor income
1:46 pm
backgrounds from going into university? i have not had one communication from a constituent telling me that these proposals will make it more likely that they will go to a university. i've had many representations saying this will put them going to university altogether. is that true, my right honorable friend? >> it's a view of an organization that's done more on this issue. and i think we need to respect it. mr. speaker, if you forgive me, i won't take any further interventions. i have been speaking longer than i intended. i have a couple of points. mr. speaker, on this issue, over the weekend we got a bit of a breakthrough. the government continues that high fees will help low-income students. fee waivers for students on free school meals. the government decided it will save them money because they don't have to make loans. it cost the universities money because they have to match funds. it's a limited plan of 18,000 out of two million students in
1:47 pm
higher education. and in case the members don't know, free school meals is for those that don't work. how about the millions of families [inaudible] i look forward to the next election when they have to explain when john smith whose parents don't work will get 18,000 pounds off their fees while susan jones on the same street whose parents always worked gets no help at all. i welcome the secretary of state to work on this because he should have a word with his colleagues about how this supports the idea. now, mr. speaker, it will punish the very universities that have done most to widen participation. the university which took 120 students from free school meal backgrounds in 2006, 2007, would have to find three quarters of a pounds in match funding. cambridge would only have to find 120,000.
1:48 pm
where is the sense in punishing success and rewarding failure? and the i.s.f. says it provides a financial incentive for universities to turn away students from poorer backgrounds. it does not make sense. but all the signs are of government policy in disarray. no wide paper. every day trying to respond to the criticism. last week we showed 2/3 of part timers wouldn't benefit from their scheme so they had to rush out a minor change yesterday. last week under pressure from me the business secretary said he'd write the -- he has. it's an empty document. let me just take one point. the higher education secretary said in this house that it would be an exceptional circumstances that universities might charge 9,000 pounds. let me tell you in the house that nowhere in the guidance documents that's being issued
1:49 pm
does the term exceptional circumstances appear. it doesn't tell them to limit the higher fees tokes anticipational circumstances. he doesn't define expectational circumstances himself. he doesn't -- exceptional circumstances himself. the truth is he came to this house -- he came to this house making a fine promise that 9,000 pounds would be exceptional circumstances. he has done nothing to bring that about because he knows he will not be able to enforce it. mr. speaker, it's not the right way to handle this house. mr. speaker, if i had more time i would have spoken on the objection to the b.m.a., of the teaching organizations, the fact that universities should train teachers, have no idea how they will be funded. i am just going to leave it at this point, mr. speaker -- mr.
1:50 pm
speaker, can i just end by saying a few words to those ministers and back benches who even now are struggling to reconcile party loyalty with the desire to do the right thing, the desire to thwart -- [laughter] the desire to help our teachers and universities. mr. speaker, there are millions -- there are millions of parents and students and future students who are looking at this debate and will be wondering why it is such a laughing matter. so mr. speaker, i do want to say a few words to those who are wrestling with this issue. it would be -- it would be crass to compare the two issues, i know, but i was a minister once who resided on a point of principle, and i will
1:51 pm
say to those ministers and back benches who are considering their position today, i do know what you're going through. it is very hard to stand beside friends and colleagues with whom you shared many things with. i say it, you realize it wasn't half as bad as you thought it would be before you did it. the self-respecting gains far outweighs any position of power or income. and the truth is that in any generous political party, and mine is not the only generous political party, there is usually a way back. mr. speaker, this matter matters so much to so many people. i say to the house, if you don't believe in it, vote against it. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise to speak in a debate that i actually do not want to be speaking in, and i don't
1:52 pm
believe this debate should be happening today, and i don't believe it should be happening in the way that it is happening. mr. speaker, it is only seven months since the general election, the government was formed. it's less than two months since we saw the brown report for the first time. and it's a month, a month since the government announced its proposals on higher education. and yet today we are being forced to make the significant vote without considering the other proposals with a mere five-hour debate. now, mr. speaker, i make clear that i am a government back bencher and i support this coalition government and i support what it is doing. and i also support and understand and accept that in the coalition both parties and i believe they need to compromise.
1:53 pm
mr. speaker, being asked to vote to increase fees of up to 9,000 pounds is not a compromise. and it's not something that many conservative back benchers should have been asked to consider. mr. speaker, as you know and the house will know, i have an amendment which unfortunately was not successful today in my name and the name of the honorable member for new foresty and new members across the house and that is the lack of intent to get the government -- because the simple reality is even if their proposals are the best way forward for higher education, and i personal do not believe that they are, but even if they are, they have to accept that they simple low have not convinced people. not only on these benches but far more importantly in the wider public and -- future students and their families. of course, i'll give way. >> i thank my honorable friend
1:54 pm
for giving way. would he like to tell the house what he thinks is a reasonable percentage of time spent on this debate relative to the amount of time given by the previous government on the debate as to whether this country should go to war with iraq? >> i say to the honorable gentleman that sometimes governments are wrong and sometimes you need to -- i will give way. >> summarize your debate. does not know for certain if he's right. the honorable members -- though equally wise does not know for certain if -- doesn't the house need the opportunity to assess the results of whatever [inaudible] and not surely irreversible? >> my friend is right. we do not have adequate evaluation to elay those concerns that are out there. now, mr. speaker, i am going to talk about the pledge.
1:55 pm
indeed, i didn't sign just one pledge. i actually signed two pledges. i signed the national union of students pledge that in this very house and i signed the league university union pledge at the university. and i will say now i do not regret signing either of those pledges. so let me also tell you that is not solely and is not even the most important reason why i am voting against the government today. i am voting against the government today because i simply cannot accept that fees up to 9,000 pounds are the fairest and most sustainable way of funding higher education. i oppose -- before i was in this house i opposed the labour government introducing fees in the first place. and i oppose the labour government introducing other fees. i said, as many honorable members, including the courageous honorable back benchers said this will lead one day to huge i creases in fees and it becomes a never-ending task. and sadly that has been shown
1:56 pm
to be absolutely correct, mr. speaker. i'm not going to give way, i'm afraid, because the honorable lady will have the chance to intervene on other people. i do apologize. mr. speaker, we do need to look at higher education funding but we must look at it as a whole within the education system with apprenticeships, with further education. and the single vote today does not none of that. in terms of the current proposals on the table now, i have said all along, and i look at my right honorable friend to say that there are indeed many progressive things within the proposals in terms of the levels at which graduates has to make a contribution. in terms of part-time students, that's very welcomed. in terms of the threshold of being 21,000, i fully acknowledge all those things. but i have to say that we need
1:57 pm
to debunk a myth here. all those positive things that are in there, and they are in there, and they're progressive in the graduate contribution, they do not need to be tied to a huge increase in fees. that is simply a non-- it's simply not true to say you cannot have one without having the other. i think that is a crucial flaw in the government's argument today. and certainly the reality is -- the secretary of state knows there is much confusion about the proposals. and we all know that. but surely there's not another reason to have more time for the government to try to convince people? because he has to accept, and all ministers who will be supporting this today, has to accept they have not won this argument. in my opinion, rushing through things through with a level of concern and anxiety in the way this is being done without
1:58 pm
perhaps a parliamentary scrutiny is certainly a recipe for bad policy. i also have to say that in terms of the idea that this particular set of proposals, when we finally get to them in the white paper, that they will actually deal with the deficit, i think is very questionable and indeed the reality, when you look at the proposals that will be put forward to the house in the white paper in the new year actually there will be huge amounts of money going from the treasury into university. huge amounts of money. but the difference is that actually those figures have moved away from expenditure and put into a different column. that is the reality. and to read from the higher education policy institute report, i quote, the proposals will increase public expenditure through this parliament and into the next.
1:59 pm
and this is -- and that is as likely that in the long term the government's proposal will cost more than they will save. it's smoke and mirrors. so i'm afraid that the arguments to increase fees to 9,000 pounds, albie it backed by those progressive elements is not certainly enough to persuade me. they are not enough to persuade many colleagues from these benches and indeed colleagues from my coalition partners and friends' benches also. so -- >> we'll leave this debate in the british house of commons to go live now to the u.s. house of representatives as members are about to gavel in this afternoon. there are 16 bills and resolutions scheduled. they range from native american land issues to library services. both are expected to take place at 6:00 -- votes are expected to take place at 6:00 eastern. the senate is going to look at the bush tax cuts.
2:00 pm
now live coverage of the u.s. house. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father coughlin. chaplain coughlin: lord god, at this time when you desire to be close to your people, the truth of isiah the prophet frightens us. so we withdraw to a more comfortable place, content with fictitious demands on our time. you said to isiah, since this people draws near with words only and honors me with lips alone, their hearts are far from me. their reverence for me has become routine observance.
2:01 pm
i will now deal with this people in surprising and wondrous fashion. woe to shows who would hide their plans thinking they are too deep for the lord. who work in the dark saying, who sees us or who really knows what we are about. it is time, lord, to shake us from our stupor, send forth your word to shatter our illusions and all our fears both now and forever. amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from utah, mr. chaffetz.
2:02 pm
mr. chaffetz: please join me in the pledge. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house the following communication. the speaker pro tempore: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives. madam, this is to notify you formally pursuant to rule 8 of the rules of the house of representatives that i have been served with a subpoena for testimony issued by the united states district court for the eastern district of michigan. after consultation with the office of general counsel, i have determined that compliance with the subpoena is consistent with the precedents and privileges of the house. signed, sincerely, bart stupak, member of congress.
2:03 pm
the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house the following communication. the speaker pro tempore: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives. madam, this is to notify you formally pursuant to rule 8 of the rules of the house of representatives that i have been served with a subpoena for testimony issued by the united states district court for the eastern district of michigan. after consultation with the office of general counsel, i ever determined that the compliance with the subpoena is consistent with the precedents and privileges of the house. signed, sincerely, scott slowingal, chief of staff, congressman bart stupak. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house the following enrolled bill. the clerk: senate 3817, an act to amend the child abuse prevention and treatment act, the family violence prevention and services act, the child abuse prevention and treatment and adoption reform act of
2:04 pm
1978, and the abandoned infant assistance act of 1988 to re-authorize the act and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will now entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for other purposes the gentleman from south carolina rise? mr. wilson: mr. speaker, i ask to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. wilson: u.s. district jubbling henry e. hudson of virginia struck down the individual mandate within the health care takeover as unconstitutional. this job-killing mandate infringes upon an individual's right to choose whether to participate in the government takeover. the ruling affirms that this legislation goes beyond the government's power to regulate interstate commerce. virginia attorney general ken cucinnelli has taken the lead protecting citizens' rights.
2:05 pm
americans should not be forced to purchase health insurance by the federal government. many small businesses cannot afford it. it's time that congress repeal the government takeover of health care and replace it with a pasheent centered program. this is the solution that provides a viable answer to america's health care issues. in conclusion, god bless our troops, we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. smith: mr. speaker, it's hard to imagine a worse example of the media bias than the national coverage of the so-called dream act. seldom were the facts given to the american people. the national media set it deprived quote 65,000 youngsters. it would give amnesty to at least one million to two million illegal immigrants up to the age of 30.
2:06 pm
and no one in the national media mentioned that no hearings had been held on the bill and no committee had approved it. the dream act would mean fewer jobs for american workers. and the congressional budget office said it would cost taxpayers billions of dollars. but you won't hear that from the national media. even if the national media won't, congress should put the interest of american workers and taxpayers first. that's what the last election was all about. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. dreier: mr. speaker, the sudden and unexpected passing of ambassador richard holbrooke has been very, very sad news for americans and it obviously has sent shock waves throughout the international community. dick holbrooke is someone with whom i was privileged to work on a number of issues over the past decade and a half and i will say that he was known for
2:07 pm
being rough and tumble. he was described by one as the bulldozer diplomat. but i have to say that dick holbrooke was a true polley got. he knew in dealing with diplomatic challenges that it took different talents and different styles regardless of where he was in the world, he was able to apply his unique talents. and i have to say that we worked together on a number of very important issues as we look at the challenge that exist today in afghanistan and pakistan, his passing will be a real loss for that effort, but his passing should lead us to redouble our commitment to pursue the goal that i believe dick holbrooke always pursued and that was for peace, stability, the rule of law, and self-determination around the world. our thoughts and prayers go to his wife and two sons. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from arkansas rise?
2:08 pm
>> i ask permission to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. boozman: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to honor one of america's bravest. sergeant david robonson of fort smith, arkansas, who valiantly sacrificed his life in support of combat missions in afghanistan. service runs in his family with a grandfather who served as a sharpshooter in the military. so when at a young age he told his mother he wanted to serve in the military, it was no surprise. he followed in his grandfather's footsteps, going into the artillery field when he joined the army in 2004. as a member of the second cavalier, he served as a -- cavalry, he served as a gun ir, rifleman, and ammunitions handler. at the young age of 25 he had remarkable service to our nation. during his three tours, two in operation iraqi freedom and one in support of operation enduring freedom.
2:09 pm
my prayers and the prayers of arkansas are with sergeant robinson's family. including his wife and three young children, jeremy, tyler, and madison. i humbly offer my thanks to sergeant david robinson, a true american hero, for his selfless service to the security and well-being of americans. and i ask my colleagues to keep his family in their thoughts and prayers during this very difficult time. with that i yield back the balance of my time.
2:10 pm
2:11 pm
2:12 pm
2:13 pm
2:14 pm
the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to rule 8 of rule 20, the chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered or on which the vote incurs objection under clause 6 of rule 20. record votes on postponed questions will be taken later. . for what purpose does the gentleman from washington seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent that the house pass s. 1448. the clerk: an act a bill to
2:15 pm
amend the act of august 9, 1955, to authorize the coquille indian tribe, the confederated tribes of siletz indians, the confederated tribes of the coos, lower umpqua, and siuslaw, the klamath tribes, and the burns paiute tribe to to obtain 99-year lease authority for trust land. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from washington, mr. larsen, and the gentleman from utah, mr. chaffetz, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from washington. mr. larsen: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. larsen: and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration. mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. larsen: under what is known as the long-term leasing act, lands held in trust for indian tribes may be leased for a variety of purposes for a term of no greater than 25 years. with an option for an additional 25 years if approved by the bureau of indian
2:16 pm
affairs. often, tribes find that in order to operate more efficiently and sustain economic development activities they need to be able to lease trust funds for longer periods. in fact, the various acts of congress, approximately 50 tribes have been granted the ability to issue leases not to exceed 99 years. the pending legislation would afford this extended leasing authority for tribes in the state of oregon. i want to commend our colleagues, mr. defazio and mr. schrader from oregon, for their work in getting this bill to the floor. i ask members to support it and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from utah. mr. chaffetz: i thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. chaffetz: thank you, mr. speaker. as a matter of policy operating 99-year lease terms from tribes, we have no objections to this bill. we'll verve the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time.
2:17 pm
the chair recognizes the gentleman from washington. mr. larsen: does -- mr. speaker, could i ask the gentleman from utah if he has any further speakers? the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from utah. mr. chaffetz: mr. speaker, we have no additional speakers. and we'll yield the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from washington. mr. larsen: with that, mr. speaker, again, i want to urge our colleagues to support s. 1448 and yield the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman having yielded, all time having expired, the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass senate bill 1448. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.
2:18 pm
for what purpose does the gentleman from west virginia seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass s. 2906. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: senate 2906, an act to amend the act of august 9, 1965, to modify a provision relating to leases involving certain indian tribes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from west virginia, mr. rahall, and the gentleman from utah, mr. chaffetz, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from west virginia. mr. rahall: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. rahall: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. mr. rahall: the gentleman is recognized. mr. rahall: mr. speaker, as with the bill we just considered, the pending legislation would amend the long-term leasing act to allow several tribes in this case located in washington state to issue leases for trust lands
2:19 pm
for terms not to exceed 99 years. as business opportunities and economic considerations change over time, leases longer than what is allowed in current law are often necessary to facilitate economic development on trust lands. in closing, this legislation would advance tribal sovereignty, promote job growth and speed up business deals. i want to commend our colleague, representative adam smith, who has pressed for passage of s. 2906. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from utah. mr. chaffetz: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. chaffetz: thank you, mr. speaker. as a matter of policy authorizing 9-year leers for terms is a means of increasing tribal independence for the bureau of indian bureaucracy. therefore, we have no objection to this bill. we reserve the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman. mr. rahall: i'm prepared to yield back if the gentleman
2:20 pm
from utah is. mr. chaffetz: mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from west virginia. mr. rahall: i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. now all time having expired, the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass senate bill 2906. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from west virginia seek recognition? mr. rahall: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and concur in the senate amendments to h.r. 1061. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 1061, an act to transfer certain land to the united states to be held in trust for the hoh indian tribe, to place land into trust for the hoh indian tribe, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the
2:21 pm
gentleman from west virginia, mr. rahall, and the gentleman from utah, mr. chaffetz, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from west virginia. mr. rahall: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. rahall: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. rahall: mr. speaker, h.r. 1061 as amended would transfer certain federal and nonfederal land in the state of washington to the hoh indian to be held in trust by the united states for the benefit of the tribe. the hoh indian tribe is located on the coast of washington. its coastline is situated as such that it's subject to frequent flooding preventing the sustainable use of this land by the tribe. due to this situation, the tribe has acquired approximately 420 acres of land from private sources to relocate its government offices and tribal members. the bill would place this newly acquired 420 acres of land into trust for the tribe and as well
2:22 pm
transfer acres of land for the tribe in order to connect the tribe's newly acquired lands to its current lands. on june 28, 2010, the house passed this legislation under suspension of the rules by a vote of 347-0. the senate made technical amendments to the bill to clarify that the land would be placed into trust in accordance with the department of interior's regulations for mandatory trust land acquisitions. the senate passed the bill by unanimous consent on september 29, 2010. in closing, i would commend our colleague and my fellow classmate, representative norm dicks of washington, for his hard work and dedication to this legislation, and i ask my colleagues to support its passage. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from utah. mr. chaffetz: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. chaffetz: thank you, mr. speaker. the case for adding a small amount of land to the ho h.res.er vation is compelling.
2:23 pm
because of the tribe's reservation receives about 140 inches of rain per year and is located within a tsunami zone. the tribe must expand its eastern border inland from the coast so they can construct safe housing and other facilities outside of this tsunami zone. to accomplish this, h.r. 1061 places in trust several tracks of land for the tribe. most of which are currently owned by the tribe. these additions to the reservation are separated from the existing reservation by its 37 acre par sell of land that is part of the olympic national park. h.r. 1061 transfers ownerships of olympic national park land to the tribe without consideration. this transfer creates a contiguous intact reservation assured in the form of a road to highway 101. this bill also sets an important and needed precedent by transferring these 37 acres without extorting either a land exchange or payment to the federal government. there are many instances when fairness and necessity justify the transfer of federal lands to states, localities, tribes
2:24 pm
or other american citizens. these are also instances when roads are vital to the park neighbors and park visitors should be repaired and built even though they should be located in otherwise protected areas. it's worth noting that the national park service supports transferring this land without the need for a land exchange or compensation. i also note the absolute science and hence supplied support from advocacy groups to give away in 37 acres of national park land. i yield back the balance of my time -- i reserve the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from west virginia. mr. rahall: mr. speaker, as i mentioned in my opening remarks, i commend the gentleman from washington, the incoming ranking minority member of the transportation -- the house appropriations committee and my fellow classmate, a gentleman who has worked very hard on this legislation. i now yield him such time as he may desire, the gentleman from washington, mr. dicks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. dicks: i thank you very much -- your yielding to me.
2:25 pm
i really appreciate the leadership that you provided and the committee's provided. i rise to urge final passage of h.r. 1061, the hoh indian tribe safe homeland act, which i sponsored. the hoh tribe lives right on the pacific coast in the sixth district which i represent. the reservation is in a spectacularly beautiful area, but the location leaves the hohs in constant danger of tsunamis. this legislation would allow the hoh tribe to move many structures out of the tsunami impact zone. this legislation passed the house in june. in september the bill was amended and passed in the senate. this amended version, which is supported by all parties, is what the house is considering today. i urge that we again pass this legislation and allow for the hoh tribe to build a safer future uphill from the tsunami danger. h.r. 1061 accomplishes this goal by transferring a small parcel land in olympic national park to the tribe. in addition, the legislation
2:26 pm
will place into trust this transferred park service land along with other lands recently acquired by the tribe. i really cannot emphasize the necessity of this legislation for the safety of the hoh tribe. the reservation is located where the hoh river dramatically empties in the pacific ocean. as i said earlier, real danger comes with this spectacular beauty. the pacific ocean has been extremely active seismic zone, including in washington state. earthquakes in the eastern pacific always cause concern along the washington coast as folks are forced to monitor the tsunami situation. the hoh tribe also is met with flooding every year. we have rainy seasons. they have destroyed buildings. a few years ago my office had to call the washington state national guard to hip the tribe place sandbags.
2:27 pm
the situation is intensifying as they erode the very limited land on the one square mile reservation. with all the reservation within a tsunami zone and nearly all of it in a floodplain, the hmbs oh tribe has trouble qualifying for assistance. the b.i.a., fema and h.u.d. are precluded from providing assistance to the tribe due to the reservation's location and its vulnerability to natural disasters. although the threat always has existed, the desire to move the tribe to safety intensified after the 2004 indian ocean earthquake and resulting tsunami which killed more than 200,000 people. the hoh tribe developed its own strategy which i wholeheartedly championed. with its own resources, the tribe bought several nearby parcels of land suitable away from most danger. the washington state department
2:28 pm
of resources have gave them land in the same area. h.r. 1061 will transfer them 37 acres of olympic national park land. so i will place the rest of my statement in the record. i just want to say that this is a very good bill, and i appreciate the leadership of the committee and bipartisan support that this bill has achieved. and i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the chair recognizes the gentleman from utah. mr. chaffetz: thank you, mr. speaker. this is a reasonable and needed piece of legislation. i commend the bill's sponsor and all those who have worked on it. i'll continue to reserve the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman continues to reserve the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from west virginia. mr. rahall: mr. speaker, i'm very honored now to yield five minutes to a very valued member of our committee on natural resources and a colleague of ours who is no stranger to the effects of tsunami among his
2:29 pm
people, the gentleman from american samoa, mr. faleomavaega. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. faleomavaega: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to extend and revise my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. faleomavaega: i want to thank the gentleman from west virginia, our distinguished chairman of the committee of natural resources, and i do also thank my good friend, the gentleman from utah, and their management of this proposed legislation. mr. speaker, having personally experienced what it means to go through an earthquake and tsunami, i rise today in strong support of this proposed legislation for the hoh indian tribe safe homelands act, a bill that transfers certain federal lands in the state of washington to be held in federal trust for the hoh indian tribe. i want to thank especially the gentleman from washington, mr. norm dicks, for sponsoring this important bill, and i would also like to thank the chairman of our committee, the members of their committee -- of our committee for their support. while this bill serves primarily to transfer the hoh indian reservation and carries out a message to support the
2:30 pm
welfare of the tribal members while reinforcing our long-standing responsibility to the first americans. . established by executive order, the reservation is home to a tribe of nearly 300 members whose livelihood depends primarily on fishing. located 28 miles south and 84 miles north of aberdeen, it consists of 443 acres of land. recently the reservation has been overwhelmed by river flooding caused by torrential rain and storm surges from the pacific ocean. living also in one of the rainiest places in the contiguous united states, many of the tribal members' homes are enriched -- encircled by sandbags to hold back the water and most of the land is within the 100-year flood plain of the river. exacerbating what is already a tough economic development situation. now more than ever floods are more frequent and more aggressive.
2:31 pm
also due to hardened river banks for erosion control and influence of timber companies in the uplands. i want to urge my colleagues to support this proposed bill and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from utah. mr. chaffetz: we have no additional speakers. it doesn't appear there are any other speakers. i'll yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from west virginia. mr. rahall: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. all time now having expired, the question is, will the house suspend the rules and concur in the senate amendments to h.r. 1061. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the senate amendments are agreed to, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table.
2:32 pm
for what purpose does the gentleman from west virginia seek recognition? mr. rahall: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill s. 1609. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: senate 16 09, an act to authorize a single fisheries cooperative for the baring sea, aleutian islands subsector, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from west virginia, mr. rahall, and the gentleman from utah, mr. chaffetz, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from west virginia. mr. rahall: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. rahall: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. rahall: the pending legislation, the catcher processor subsector single fishery cooperative act was introduced by senator cantwell in august, 2009.
2:33 pm
subsequently our colleague, congressman larson from the state of washington -- larsen from the state of washington introduced the companion legislation. it's the total amount of fishing quota is divided among a group of fishermen. this tool is used to manage several fisheries in waters off alaska. however one particular fishery in this area, the pacific cod longline catcher processors is not managed using catch shares. s. 1609 authorizes the secretary of commerce to approve this fleet as a cooperative operating a catch share. i commend our colleague, the gentleman from washington, mr. rick larsen, for his diligence, he's discussed this with me on numerous occasions and i commend his leadership on this legislation. i also recognize the efforts to bring the bill to the floor by my good friend and colleague from alaska, mr. don young. i would note that this measure is fully supported by the
2:34 pm
ranking member of our full committee, doc hastings of washington. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from utah. mr. chaffetz: mr. speaker, i'd like to yield such time as he may consume to my distinguished colleague from alaska, mr. young. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from alaska. mr. young: i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. young: i rise in strong support of h.r. 3910. this is a brilliant -- very important bill to the state of alaska and washington. i'd like to complement my friend, mr. larsen shall for his work on this legislation. i was originally co-sponsor of this. this is a much needed bill for the management of fish in alaska as well as the state of washington where most of my fishermen do come from. i'd also like to thank steny hoyer, the majority leader, for bringing this bill to the floor and making sure it becomes a reality. this is a bill that was strongly supported by the whole
2:35 pm
delegation from the state of washington, from the state of alaska. senators as well as house members. there was no objection to this legislation. as an example how we can work together on an issue that affects both areas. it is really much more desperate and i want to complement everybody at work on this legislation. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from west virginia. mr. rahall: i yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from washington, mr. larsen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. larsen: mr. speaker, i rise today to speak in favor of s. 1609, the longline catcher processor subsector single fishery cooperative act. this bill introduced by senator cantwell of washington state is a senate companion to h.r. 3910, legislation i introduced in the house along with representative don young of alaska. this is a bipartisan effort. has the support of representative doc hastings, representative dave reichert and jay inslee of washington state as well. this bill will further efforts
2:36 pm
to rationalize pacific cod fishery in theberg -- in the behring -- bering sea. it enables safer more environmentally sound fishing problem particulars while providing much needed economic stability. it currently operates as a derby style fishery. providing the opportunity for participants to transition from this style to cooperative model is essential to meeting conservation dwoles and most importantly will significantly improve the safety of life at sea. fishing cooperatives provide more economic stability and predictibility. to help prevent the types of severe price swings this fishery experienced last year. this type of instability not only impacts the market and consumers, but threatens the ability for mostly family owned businesses to continue fishing. the economic stabilization of the fleet will also allow for new investments in both vessels and equipment and much needed jobs for shipyards throughout
2:37 pm
the puget sound region. it has broad support, within the commercial fishing industry, state of alaska, state of washington, and environmental community. i urge the house to pass this bipartisan bill s. 1609. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah is recognized. mr. chaffetz: thank you, mr. speaker. we have no objection to this bill. we believe it should be passed and sent to the president for signature. we'll go ahead and yield back the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from west virginia. mr. rahall: mr. speaker, i yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from american samoa, mr. faleomavaega. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. faleomavaega: i thank the speaker. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. faleomavaega: i want to thank the distinguished gentleman from west virginia, the chairman of our committee, and my good friend from utah, on the other side of the aisle, for their management and support of this legislation. mr. speaker, i want to associate myself with the
2:38 pm
statement made earlier by the chief sponsor of this legislation, my good friend, the gentleman from washington. i know a little bit about the industry of fishing. this is certainly important for the gentleman's district and members who are affected from the great state of washington. i urge my colleagues to support this proposed legislation. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from utah. mr. chaffetz: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from west virginia. mr. rahall: i yield back, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. all time now having expired, the question is, will the house suspend the rules and advance senate bill 1609. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table.
2:39 pm
for what purpose does the gentleman from west virginia seek recognition? mr. rahall: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass s. 1405. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: senate 1405, an act to redesignate the longfellow national historic site, massachusetts, as the longfellow house-washington's headquarters national historic site. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from west virginia, mr. rahall, and the gentleman from utah, mr. chaffetz, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from west virginia, mr. rahall. mr. rahall: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on the bill upped consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. rahall: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. rahall: mr. speaker, the pending legislation would rename the longfellow national historic site in cambridge, massachusetts, as the longfellow house-washington's headquarters national historic site. to better reflect the many chapters of american history which unfolded at this historic
2:40 pm
home. this bill is one of the last measures sponsored by the late senator from massachusetts, edward m. kennedy. senator kennedy was instrumental in securing the funds needed to preserve this national historic site and it is fitting we pass this legislation, renaming a site which meant so much to him. i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this small final piece of legislative legacy left to us by one of the true giants to ever serve in this congress. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from utah. mr. chaffetz: thank you, mr. speaker. i just want to -- i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. chaffetz: s. 1405 has been adequately explained by the majority and we support the legislation. see no reason to oppose it. we'll reserve the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from west virginia. mr. rahall: i have no further requests for time, mr. speaker. i'm prepared to yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the
2:41 pm
gentleman from utah is recognized. mr. chaffetz: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. chaffetz: i just want to briefly thank the chairman. i am a freshman here in this body. i appreciate the leadership he had in the way that he conducted the natural resources committee. i understand he's going to be a ranking member -- leadership in perhaps a different committee. i didn't want to let this time pass and this opportunity to pass without thanking him for his leadership and fairness in being able to share things with young folks like myself who are new to the house. i just want to wish him all the best and thank him for his leadership. i look forward to spending christmas eve here with you. unfortunately. hopefully not. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from west virginia. mr. rahall: before i respond to that, mr. speaker, i yield a couple minutes to my colleague from american samoa, mr. faleomavaega. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized.
2:42 pm
mr. faleomavaega: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i think also to compliment the gentleman from utah's statement. this probably will be the last opportunity that i would have to offer my compliments and utmost respect and commendation for the way the gentleman from west virginia has conducted the affairs of our natural resources committee under his chairmanship for which i am deeply honored to be a part of. i certainly want to say that second to none in terms of his leadership, service, and his commitment in serving our nation. i want to say that for the record and to thank my good friend from utah for his compliment as well. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah is recognized. mr. chafelts: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from west virginia. mr. rahall: thank you, mr. speaker. i do want to extend my appreciation to the gentleman from utah for his comments. this may very well be the last
2:43 pm
time our committee on natural resources will have bills on the floor of the house in this 111th congress. i wish to take a moment of personal reflection to thank not only the gentleman from utah but my ranking member, the gentleman from state of washington, doc hastings, as well. i talked to mr. hastings this morning. he's not sleepless in seattle but he's snowed in seattle. and unable to be here today. i did want to acknowledge his position on our committee and wish him the best next year as he assumes the reins of the leadership of chairman of our committee. it has been, i think, good couple terms under my chairmanship. we worked in a nonpartisan manner as much as feasible and as much as possible. not every bill have we seen eye to eye on, but we have respectfully agreed to disagree where we have disagreed. i also want to thank the members on the majority side, my colleagues from all over
2:44 pm
this country and american territories, have been very helpful in drafting important legislation that has fallen in line with our vital responsibilities as stewards of our public land. i also want to say a word of commendation to the staffs on both sides. we have brought numerous bills, i don't have a final tally in front of me, to the floor of this house. . are still languishing over in that other body, but it is the work of the staffs on both the majority side and minority side for the manner in which they have worked cooperatively and in a bipartisan fashion over these four years that i have chaired this committee. in particular the gentleman sitting to my right, jim, has been with me over three decades and while we will move on to another committee in the next congress, we'll always remember our years on the natural resources committee working so well with the minority and with both sides. again i wish to express my
2:45 pm
appreciation to my ranking member, doc hastings. all the members of our committee, both republican and especially on my side, the democratic side. thank you, mr. speaker. . i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from utah. mr. chaffetz: i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: has yielded back. all time having expired. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass senate bill 1405. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to -- mr. rahall: mr. speaker, i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered.
2:46 pm
pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed.
2:47 pm
the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass the bill senate concurrent resolution 72. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the concurrent resolution. the clerk: senate concurrent resolution 72, a concurrent resolution recognizing the 45th anniversary of the white house fellows program. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from california, ms. chu, and the gentleman from utah, mr. chaffetz, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california. ms. chu: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. ms. chu: i now yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. chu: mr. speaker, i rise in support of senate concurrent resolution 72, a concurrent
2:48 pm
resolution recognizing the 45th anniversary of the white house fellows program. senate concurrent resolution 72 was introduced by the senator from kansas, sam brownback, on september 22, 2010. the senate passed the resolution by unanimous consent 2010gentleman from texas representative joe barton, on september 28, 2010, and was referred to the committee on reform suggested by then president of presnson established the president's commission on white house fellowship on october 3, 1964. ogras mission was to give highly promising young citizens firsthand high-level
2:49 pm
experience with the workings of the federal government and to increase their sense of participation in national affairs. the nonpartisan program selects applicants per year to take a full-time paid fellowship position working with senior white house staff, cabinet secretaries and other top government officials. this type of participation of the highest levels of our government's leadership develops experience vital to a continued career serving the public. the hundreds of former white house fellows have gone on to serve the public in many critical roles. they have been appointed judges, u.s. attorneys, ambassadors and cabinet officers. they have been elected to local, state and national office, including here in the house of representatives and in the senate. mr. speaker, let us now recognize the legacy of leadership that the white house fellows program has provided to our country for the last 45 years through the passage of
2:50 pm
senate concurrent resolution 72, recognizing the program on its 45th anniversary. i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting it, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from utah is recognized. mr. chaffetz: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from texas, mr. barton. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. barton: i thank the gentleman from utah. i want to thank the leadership on both sides for allowing and supporting this resolution. i'm happy in the house to be the primary sponsor. i also want to commend both speaker pelosi and minority leader boehner for scheduling this so timely. i was told yesterday it would be on the floor at 2:45, and i walked on the floor at 2:43 and it was on the floor at 2:45. it shows that the house can work in a bipartisan efficient manner when it so desires.
2:51 pm
mr. speaker, i was a white house fellow in the class of 1981 and 1982 under president ronald reagan. i was one of 14 fellows that year. i worked for the secretary of energy, the honorable james edwards of south carolina, the former governor of south carolina. the deputy secretary was kent anderson, and my director of report was jay hunter child iii, the director of policy planning and analysis. in my class in 1981 and 1982 we had mike alleman, who is now the c.e.o. of jcpenney. and the senior official at the world bank. and later became a presidential appointee under president bush. we had several military officers in tom shule. we had a police captain from oakland, chip stewart. and we had a cheerleader from the new england patriots who later worked for jay edgar -- worked for the director of the
2:52 pm
f.b.i. we had a very diverse class. the white house fellows is nonpartisan. in fact, i don't recollect one political question being asked me in the interview process to show you the caliber of the folks that interviewed me. in the semifinals at the l.b.j. school in austin, texas, i was interviewed by hillary rodham clinton and sarah weddington, who was the chief attorney in support of roe v. wade. at the washington finals in washington, d.c., ed fullner, who is now head of the heritage foundation, was one of the individuals who interviewed me. you had very staunch democrats and also very staunch conservative republicans. but they were interested then and now not in your political views so much as they were interested in your vision for
2:53 pm
america and where you had been and even more importantly where you might go in the future. most fellows are in their late 20's to mid 30's. some are as old as their mid 40's. you serve for one year for one of the senior officials in the white house or the office of the vice president or a cabinet secretary. it's a very diverse experience. you have real work to do, as has been pointed out, you are paid at the g.s. schedule 14. but you also develop a friendship with your fellows and you have what's called an educational program where you meet with officials of that administration but also leaders in the country. we met my fellowship year with, of course, the president, the vice president, all the cabinet secretaries, but we also met with tip o'neill. we met with tom foley. tip o'neill was then speaker and tom foley, i was believe
2:54 pm
the majority leader or whip. i believe mr. foley was whip. we met with leon jaworski, who was the prosecutor in watergate. we also, each fellowship class gets to go on some trips, both domestically and internationally. our trip was -- we took three domestic trip or four domestic trips. we went to california where congressman leon panetta hosted us. we went to new york city, had a helicopter ride where we went over the old yankee stadium. we went to chicago. and i was able to get the class to come down to texas and we visited in texas. it is a tremendous program. since president johnson initiated it in 1965, over 672 young men and women have served this white house fellows -- as white house fellows. members of this body include in
2:55 pm
addition to myself, congressman -- former congressman campbell of california, senator tim werth of colorado and in the other body, senator dave karnes of the great state of nebraska. it's a great program that encourages you once you've been a white house fellow to be in public service or at least community service, either in the business world or in civic or in some cases elected office. i wouldn't be on the floor of the house of representatives today, mr. speaker, if it had not been for the white house fellows program. i believed before i became a fellow that washington was this mystic place that most of the time was nonfunctional and very difficult to navigate. the white house fellowship program gave me a window on government in washington in both the executive and the legislative branch, and it showed me there were people of
2:56 pm
good will on both sides of the aisle in the executive and in the legislative branch. it showed me that in spite of what some people think this is a very transparent, open process. if you have an issue and you want to have an impact in our america that is still possible, and i cannot say anything but the most positive things, mr. speaker, about the white house fellows program. so i'm very glad on behalf of the other 671 former and current white house fellows to be the chief house sponsor. i'm very appreciative of it moving through the senate. very appreciative of our speaker and minority leader, mr. boehner and ms. pelosi, putting it up on the floor. i would certainly encourage a unanimous vote in support of it. i want to thank my good friend from utah for yielding. with that, mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend and verve of the balance of the time. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered.
2:57 pm
the chair recognizes the gentlelady from california. ms. chu: i have no other speakers. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from utah. mr. chaffetz: i want to thank the fellows. i urge all members to join me in support of this resolution. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. chairman -- the chair recognizes the gentlelady from california. ms. chu: mr. speaker, i urge members to support this bill. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: all time having expired, the question is will the house suspend the rules and agree to house concurrent resolution 72. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the concurrent resolution is agreed to and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.
2:58 pm
ms. chu: mr. speaker, i object to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present and i make a point of order that a quorum is not present. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? ms. chu: mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 6205. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 6205, a bill to designate the facility of the united states postal service located at 1449 west avenue in bronx, new york, as the private isaac t. cortes post office. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from california, ms. chu, and the gentleman from utah, mr. chaffetz, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from california. ms. chu: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and
2:59 pm
extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. ms. chu: i now yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. chu: mr. speaker, i rise in support of h.r. 6205, a bill to designate the facility of the united states postal service located at 1449 west avenue in bronx, new york, as the private isaac t. cortes post office. h.r. 6205 was introduced by our colleague, the gentleman from new york, representative joseph crowley, on september 23, 2010. the measure enjoys the support of new york's entire delegation to the house. private isaac t. cortes held several jobs before enlisting in the army. he was very proud to work as a security guard at yankee stadium and at one point hoped to become an officer with the new york city police department. he enlisted with the army in november, 2006, to gain
3:00 pm
experience that would help him achieve that goal, but later decided to become a career military man. private cortes served as an infantry man with the first squadron, 71st cavalry regiment, first brigade combat team, 10th mountain division light infantry out of new york. he was a humvee driver and performed operator level maintenance on the vehicle. while overseas in iraq, he participated in mountain humvee and dismounted walking patrols. he engaged in weapons catch service -- cashs. sadly in 2007, private cortes was one of two soldiers killed when an inproadvised explosive device was detonated as the vehicle rode past about 100 miles north of baghdad.
3:01 pm
his award and decorations include the purple heart, the bronze star, national defense service medal, iraq campaign medal, global war on terrorism service medal and army service ribbon. he is survived by his parents, emily and isiah, his younger brother, christopher, a young daughter, maria, and a large extended family. they remember private cortes as the kid who would help elders carry groceries, the young man who would play with his younger cousins and the father who wanted to be the best he could be for his young child. today we also remember him as the sold who are made the ultimate sacrifice -- soldier who made the ultimate sacrifice for thinks country. mr. speaker, let us now pay tribute to the life and service of private isaac t. cortes by designating the postal facility on west avenue in the bronx in his honor. i urge my colleagues to join me
3:02 pm
in supporting h.r. 6205 and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from utah. mr. chaffetz: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. chaffetz: mr. speaker, i rise today in strong support of h.r. 6205, to designate the facility of the united states postal service located at 1449 in bronx new york as the private isaac t. cortes post office. he was born and raised in the belongs and joined the army in november of 2006. after basic training he was assigned to the 10th mountain division in september, 2007, private cortes deployed to iraq to support operation iraqi freedom. sadly, mr. speaker, less than two months later, on november 27, 2007, private cortes died when the vehicle he was riding in was struck by an improvised explosive device. private cortes was award the purple heart and bronze star.
3:03 pm
mr. speaker, it's altogether fitting and proper that we name this post office to honor private cortes. this is a man who made the ultimate sacrifice for thinks country, fighting for our freedom and the freedom of the iraqi people. the least we can do is honor his memory by naming this post office after him. i urge all members to join me in supporting this bill. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from california. ms. chu: i have no further speakers and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from utah. mr. chaffetz: we'll yield back the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from california. ms. chu: mr. speaker, i again urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this measure and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. all time now having expired, the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 6205.
3:04 pm
those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. ms. chu: mr. speaker, i object to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present and i make a point of order that a quorum is not present. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this motion -- question will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition? ms. chu: mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass the bill, senate bill 3794. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: senate 3794, an act to amend chapter 5 of title 40 united states code to include organizations whose member comprised of essentially veterans as recipient organizations for the donation of federal surplus personal properties through state agencies. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the
3:05 pm
gentlewoman from california, ms. chu, and the gentleman from utah, mr. chaffetz, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from california. ms. chu: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. ms. chu: i now yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. chu: mr. speaker, on behalf of the house committee on oversight and government reform, i present s. 3794, the for vets act of 2010. the measure authorizes the transfer of federal surplus property to state agencies for donation within the state for veterans organizations. s. 3794 was introduced by our colleague in the other chamber, senator patrick leahy of vermont, on september 16, 2010. it was referred to the senate committee on homeland security and governmental affairs and agreed to in the senate with
3:06 pm
amendments by unanimous consent. the bill was referred to the house committee on oversight and government reform on november 15, 2010. this bill, which was originally known as the formerly owned resources for veterans to express thanks for service act of 2010, asks veterans groups -- adds veterans groups to the list of entities already eligible to receive federal property from federal agencies through donations. under this measure, eligible groups will include education or public health organizations whose membership is substantially comprised of veterans and whose representatives are recognized by the secretary of veterans affairs. mr. speaker, s. 3794 provides unneeded and unutilized federal property to assist our veterans in their daily lives. this is a small token of our gratitude for their sacrifices on behalf of our country.
3:07 pm
but one that can make a great difference to those proud men and women who have given so much for us. i would like to thank senator leahy, chairman touns, and ranking member eye -- towns, and ranking member issa for their hard work on this bill and encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting this commonsense legislation. thank you and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from utah. mr. chaffetz: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. chaffetz: thank you. i rise today in support of s. 3794, the for vets act of 2010. mr. speaker, this is a simple bill that is long overdue. the for vets act, known as the formerly owned resources for veterans to express thanks for service act, that's a great acronym right there, makes organizations whose membership are comprised primarily of veterans eligible to receive excess personal, personal
3:08 pm
federal property. i think it's appropriate that we draw a distinction between personal property and real property. there are major difference in the values, certainly a -- one of them. every day the federal administration donates surplus goods such as computers, home appliances, to a wide variety of organizations such as hospitals, schools and public lie brars. the for vets act adds veterans organizations to this list of eligible recipients who can receive the excess federal personal property. the property being donated under the for vets act will be items that federal government is no longer using. i can't imagine a more deserving segment of the population to which we should be donating this excess property. i'll reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the chair will receive a message. the messenger: mr. speaker, a message from the senate. the secretary: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: ms. secretary. the secretary: i have been directed by the senate to inform the house that the senate has passed s. 372, cited as the
3:09 pm
whistle blower protection enhancement act of 2010. in which the concurrence of the house is requested. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlelady from california. ms. chu: i have no further speakers and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from utah. mr. chaffetz: thank you, mr. speaker. we have no additional speakers. we'll yield back the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from california. ms. chu: mr. speaker, i again urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this measure and i yield back the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time -- the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. all time now having expired, the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass senate bill 3794. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.
3:10 pm
for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california rise? ms. chu: mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass the bill, house resolution 1743 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 1743, resolution congratulating gerda weissmann klein of being selected to receive the presidential medal of freedom. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlelady from california, ms. chu, and the gentleman from utah, mr. chaffetz, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from california. ms. chu: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. ms. chu: you -- i now yield myself as much time as i may consume.
3:11 pm
i rise in support of the measure congratulating gerda weissmann klein on being selected to receive the presidential medal of freedom. house resolution 1743 was introduced by our colleague, the gentlelady from arizona, representative harry mitchell, on december 1, 2010. the measure enjoys the support of over 90 members of the house. mr. speaker, in 1939, mrs. weissmann klein was living in poland at the age of 15. within months of the german invasion of poland that year, she began to lose her family, her beloved older brother, arthur, was taken away by the germans and the remainder of her family was forced to live in a ghetto. later the nazis separated her from her parents, sending them to auschwitz. weissmann klein was forced to spend three years in a series of concentration and slave labor camps from 1942 to 1945. in 1945 she and the other
3:12 pm
inmates of her camp were sent on a 350-mile death march to avoid the advance of allied forces. when the u.s. army liberated the survivors of the march on may 7, 1945, she was one of fewer than 120 out of 2,000 women to survive. after the war she married lieutenant kirk klein of the u.s. army, an intelligence officer present at the liberation. she settled with kirk in buffalo, new york, and had three children. she then spent decades telling her story, giving speeches and writing books, offering a message of hope drawn from her struggle for survival. she and kirk also got involved in a number of charity efforts. in 1998, she tart -- they started the gettera and kirk klein foundation, a public
3:13 pm
nonprofit foundation which promoted the teaching of tolerance, respect for others and the value of community service. currently she is focused her efforts on her new foundation, citizenship counts, a nonprofit organization that reaches us to middle and high school students to promote the appreciation and potential of american citizenship and the democratic process. for her life of service and promotion of tolerance and understanding amongst all people, president obama announced that early next year gerda weissmann klein will be one of 15 recipients of the nation's highest civilian honor, the presidential medal of freedom. mr. speaker, let us now pay tribute to mrs. weissmann klein and congratulate her on being selected for the presidential medal of freedom through the passage of house resolution 1743. i urge my colleagues to support
3:14 pm
it and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from utah. mr. chaffetz: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. chaff tchaff thank you. i rise today in support of house -- mr. chaffetz: thank you. i rise today in support of the house resolution, congratulating gerda rise weissmann klein on receiving the pet al medal of freedom. last month gerda weissmann klein was informed she would be receiving the medal of freedom. this award is the highest civilian honor that an american can receive and mrs. klein is very deserving. she was born in poland in 1924 and was taken prisoner when nazi germany invaded poland. after being separated in her parents, she spent the next six years in concentration campless. six years. in 1945, mrs. weissmann was forced to walk 453 miles in a death march were women were
3:15 pm
subjected to execution. mrs. weissmann was one of less of 120 women who miraculously survived the death march and was liberated by the u.s. soldiers. one of the soldiers who was there to liberate the women was lieutenant kurt klein. they soon fell in love and later married. mrs. weissmann klein has worked tirelessly to teach tolerance and combat hunger. she has written multiple books about her experience as a holocaust survivor. and to this day she works to promote tolerance and educate people about the horrors of the holocaust. it is with great honor i commend her on being selected to receive this award and thank her for the work she has done. at this time i'll verve the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from california. ms. chu: i'm pleased to yield five minutes to the sponsor of this resolution, representative harry mitchell from arizona.
3:16 pm
the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mitchell: mr. speaker, i rise in support of h.res. 1743 as amended, a resolution congratulating gerda weissmann klein on receiving the presidential medal of freedom. mrs. weissmann klein's story is remarkable and represents so much of what is so great about america. she was born in poland in 1924. she was just 15 years old when germany invaded her homeland in 1939, and the world she knew changed forever. her brother, arthur, was taken by the nazis. her parents were sent to a death camp in as you wits. for three years, -- in auschwitz. for three years, she was part of slave labor and consenvation camps. in 1935 gerda was one of 2,000 women to walk a 350-mile death march during which women were
3:17 pm
subjected to starvation, exposure and arbitrary execution. the death march ended in volary , czechoslovakia, when they were liberated by the united states army. she was one of 120 women who survived. one of the american army officers who helped liberated gerda was a germany-born lieutenant kurt klein. comberda and kurt fell in love, got married and moved to the united states and started a family. once here, gerda and kurt worked diligently to promote holocaust education and remembrance. they taught tolerance and worked to combat hunger. she devoted her life work with gratitude. she founded citizen camps, a nonprofit organization that teaches our young to appreciate the majesty of their american citizenship in 1957, gerda's
3:18 pm
first book, qugs all about my life" was published. it chronicles her life struggles during the holocaust. in 1996, one survivor remembers, her documentary during the holocaust, won an academy award. gerda weissmann klein's life and work have expired generations of americans and countless individuals around the world. last month, president barack obama announced that gerda weissmann klein would be awarded the presidential medal of freedom. this is the highest civilian honor that can be bestowed and is well deserved. i ask my colleagues to support this resolution, as amended. before i yield, i want to thank representative gene schmidt for partnering with me in this resolution. i want to thank chairman towns and ranking minority member issa as well as the majority and minority member staffs for helping bring this resolution to the floor. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah is recognized. mr. chaffetz: mr. speaker, i've
3:19 pm
been very critical of a lot of resolutions that have come to the floor recognizing things like the hollywood walk of fame. but there are certain people, certain things that rise to a level of excellence, that are so extraordinary that they deserve the recognition of this nation and of this body. and i find that this fits that category. and so it's my honor to join in strong support of this resolution, urge my colleagues to vote for it and i'll reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from california. ms. chu: i have no further speakers, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. mr. chaffetz: we have no further speakers, mr. speaker, and we'll yield back the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from california. ms. chu: mr. speaker, i again urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this measure, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. all time now having expired,
3:20 pm
the question is will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 1743 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended and the resolution is agreed to and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. ms. chu: mr. speaker, i object to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present and i make a point of order that a quorum is not present. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? ms. chu: mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 5446. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 5446, a bill to designate the facility of the united states postal service located at 600 florida avenue in cocoa, florida, as the harry t. and harriette moore post
3:21 pm
office. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlelady from california, ms. chu, and the gentleman from utah, mr. chaffetz, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from california. ms. chu: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. ms. chu: i now yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. chu: mr. speaker, i rise in support of h.r. 5446, a bill to designate the facility of the united states postal service located at 600 florida-avenue in cocoa, florida, as the harry t. and harriette moore post office. h.r. 5446 was introduced by our colleague, the gentleman from florida, representative bill posey, on may 27, 2010. mr. speaker, harry tyson moore was born in houston, florida,
3:22 pm
on november 18, 1905. he excelled in his schooling and graduated from beth unicookman college in 1936. he soon after accepted a teaching position in a segregated in cocoa, florida, and became principal of the titusville public school in brevard county. he met harriette moore. they married on christmas day, 1926 and had two daughters. after the birth of their daughters, harry and harriette moore found the first branch of the naacp in brevard county, florida, in 1934. they also helped the florida state conference of the naacp in 1941, and harry moore took an unpaid position as its secretary. the moores led a successful effort to advance civil rights. in 1937, harry moore filed the
3:23 pm
first lawsuit in the deep south to equalize salaries of black teachers with white teachers in public schools. this effort failed at first, but it laid the foundation for other lawsuits that succeeded. in 1943, moore began reviewing every incident of lynching involving black people in the state of florida, taking afts from victims' families -- affidavits from victims' families and pursued investigations. he pursued this for the rest of his life. in 1944, the supreme court ruled in smith v. albright, that it was unconstitutional, a major victory for the naacp. moore then organized a league called the progressive voters league, and spent six years registering over 116,000 black voters in the florida democratic party. this activism led the florida public school system to fire and black list the moores in
3:24 pm
1946 after which harry moore became a full-time paid activist for the florida naacp. in july, 1949, he got involved in a police brutality case a groveland, florida, where he uncovered evidence that four black men, accused of rape, had been beaten. moore leveled brutality charges against late county sheriff willis mccaul. three of the defendants were convicted in 1949, but two of the convictions were overturned by the u.s. supreme court. lake county prepared to put the two on trial again, and on november 6, 1951, while sheriff mccaul drove them back to lake county for a pretrial hearing, he shot the two handcuffed men killing one and critically
3:25 pm
wounding the second. moore immediately called for sheriff mccaul to be suspended and indicted for murder. six weeks later in 1941 harry moore was killed when a bomb exploded beneath the floor joist under his bed. harriette died of her injuries nine days later. harry moore was the first naacp official murdered in the civil rights moore and harry and harriette moore remain the only married couple to be murdered for their activism in the era. the f.b.i. was unable to file charges due to a lack of evidence, though it was suspected to be the work of central florida members of the ku klux klan. harry moore has been called the first martyr of the 1950's civil rights movement. the moores' murder sent a shock
3:26 pm
around the country and around the world drawing attention to the movement. mr. speaker, the extensive efforts of the moores during the civil rights movement is worthy of our greatest praise. let us now pay tribute to the life and work of harry t. and harriette moore by designating the postal facility on florida avenue in cocoa, florida, in their honor. i urge my colleagues to vote in favor of h.r. 5446, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from utah. mr. chaffetz: let me say that the majority has done a wonderful and thorough job of justifying this bill. i commend mr. posey, our colleague from florida, for introducing this bill. and we urge support of this bill. we'll yield back the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from california. ms. chu: i have no further
3:27 pm
speakers, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady -- ms. chu: i again urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this measure, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. all time now having expired, the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 5446. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. ms. chu: mr. speaker, i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered.
3:28 pm
pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from new york seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move that the
3:29 pm
house suspend the rules and pass the bill s. 3167. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: senate 3167, an act to amend title 13 of the united states code to provide for a five-year term of office for the director of the census and to provide for the authority and duties of the director and deputy director of the census, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlelady from new york, mrs. maloney, and the gentleman from north carolina, mr. mchenry, will each control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from new york. mrs. maloney: mr. speaker, i thank you for recognizing me, and i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mrs. maloney: i now yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the
3:30 pm
gentlelady is recognized. mrs. maloney: mr. speaker, i rise today in strong support of the census oversight efficiency and management reform act, important bipartisan legislation that i introduced with my colleague, congressman charles dent. senators carper and coburn in a bipartisan way introduced the companion bill in the senate that recently passed the senate unanimously, 100 votes in favor, and is now before us today. this is a strong bill with no cost to american taxpayers. and it will help ensure a better census for 2020 and beyond. it's bipartisan, it's good government, it's scientific and it's good management. this important reform ensures consistent, professional
3:31 pm
management of this major scientific agency and minimizes political interference of its vital constitutional mission. i am grateful to senators carper and coburn for their bipartisan leadership on this issue in the senate. now we in the house must commit to forward thinking, to avoid problems in the runup to the 2020 census. our country owes a great deal to james madison and thomas jefferson for handing down the innovation of a census. whose goal is to ensure fair political representation. if we want to attract future census leaders in their mold, we must give the census bureau the professional independence called for this in this bill. -- in this bill. this bill is a way of saying to the american public that we
3:32 pm
honor the intent of the framers and we acknowledge the incredible participation of the public earlier this year to make the 2010 census a success. mr. speaker, all living census direct quhors served republican and democratic presidents support this bill. vincent p. baraba who worked for presidents nixon, ford and carter. john g. keen who worked for president reagan. barbara everett bryant who worked for the first president bush. martha richie and kenneth pruitt who worked for president clinton. charles lewis cancannon and steven h. murdock who worked for george w. bush. the former directors support an
3:33 pm
advocacy on behalf this bill and they testified at congressional hearings, met with congressional leaders on this bill and their participation underscoring the importance of the reforms needed to ensure that the census bureau is able to best perform its constitutional mandate of providing a fair and accurate census count. i worked with senators carper and coburn and my colleague, congressman dent, to develop this bill based on the experiences of this seven former bipartisan census directors. and what they thought we need to overcome the challenges which plagued each of the last four censuses in 1980, 1990, 2000 and in the planning for 2010 census. this bill enjoys bipartisan support across the scientific,
3:34 pm
social and political groups supported in a bipartisan way, from the leadership conference on civil rights, representing over 200 civil rights organizations, to the national association of latino elected officials, to a host of scientific organizations including the americansistical association. with senator carpers and -- american statistical association. with the senators' leadership in the senate, it passed unanimously. what this bill would do is give the director the independence to report directly to the secretary of commerce, make the director of the census bureau a presidential term appointment of five years, with a 10-year census planning cycle split into two five-year phases. planning and implementation.
3:35 pm
further it strengthens overall transparency and oversight of census management which is a very good thing. this legislation would allow the census director to report to congress and the commerce secretary directly on the needs of census to help prevent challenges such as failure to develop hand-held computer technology for the 2010 census and to have the power to say to congress when he or she disagrees with an administration poy position on the census -- position on the census. after nearly two years of consideration and debate on the ideas in this bill in both the house and the senate and now at the 11th hour and 59th minute after the senate approved it unanimously, the commerce department last night sent over their concern. the secretary supports the five-year term for the census director, but seeks some changes to the bill's requirements that
3:36 pm
the census director be permitted to respond completely to congress in testimony and to the requirement that the highest levels of management at commerce take responsibility for oversight of census management. of course this is precisely what we in congress seek to change. these two provisions are about accountability and transparency. we in congress are insisting that we finally end the musical chairs of census management we witnessed over the past several decades and that when we ask questions, we actually get the answers. we must allow the career professionals at the census to be able to tell us what is on their mind. this bill will remove barriers that presented congress from knowing the full story and planning for 2010, which put the census at risk before congress
3:37 pm
acted to fully fund a new design. i am confident this bill will ensure congress will get the information we deserve, to get us a fairly and fully funded census, no matter who occupies the white house in 2020. there are some who may not like this bill or have additional ideas for reform, but i deeply believe we can build on this legislation and continue to work together in a bipartisan way to ensure a fair and accurate full census count. there is no reason we cannot move forward on this issue today and enact these commonsense reforms now. the next census will occur during a presidential election which runs the risk of disrupting the operation. we must act now to ensure we can
3:38 pm
get a professional manager like dr. globes at census, long before 2020. we need to bring focus, transparency and accountability to the process of planning and implementing the census. there is too much at stake for our constitutional government, for the fair distribution of over 400 -- $400 billion in federal funds and for the basic trust in our statistical system to do anything less than enact this bill. with the senate action, now is the time to get this bill to the president. we can show the american public, congress can work together in a bipartisan fashion to reform government and get results. i thank you, madam speaker, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york reserves the balance of her
3:39 pm
time. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. mchenry: thank you, madam speaker, and today i rise in strong opposition of senate bill 3167. the last few years i've served as the ranking member of the census subcommittee here in the house. we've had no legislative hearing, no markup, no substantive discussions about the contents of this legislation. and here we are at the last hour of a lame duck congress and they're trying to pass a piece of legislation that haas heabt had an honest to goodness legislative hearing to or a markup. well, i guess that's what we've seen over the last 24 months out of this congress, a disregard for the legislative process. i don't think it's responsible for us to pass a major piece of legislation like this and it does have a major impact. and i certainly appreciate my colleague submitting ideas such as this to improve the census. but i don't think this is the right approach. and on that end i ask unanimous consent to submit for the record
3:40 pm
a letter from the department of commerce signed by secretary gary locke, dated december 13, stating his opposition to components of this legislation. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mchenry: thank you. i think it's important that we shouldn't reward the census bureau for repeated history of cost overrun and mishaps. these suggest the bureau needs more, not less, oversight. senate bill 3167 would grant greater autonomy to the census track. the bill would have the director bypass the commerce undersecretary for economic and statistics administration, e.s.a., in favor of a direct report to the commerce secretary. each commerce secretary has opposed this proposal. in fact, the current commerce secretary has 16 direct reports and so this further puts in place a process that i don't think is sustainable for this commerce secretary or future
3:41 pm
commerce secretaries. yesterday the current commerce secretary wrote a letter to congress saying they strongly oppose the provisions of this bill, enabling the census bureau director to submit legislative recommendations or testimony to congress without supervisory review. this letter also expresses concern about the provisions of the bill that will require the director of the census bureau to report directly to the secretary of commerce. with regards to these views, it is worth pointing out that as the commerce secretary himself who has granted the statutory authority to carry out the census, the census bureau will have less oversight if it reports directly to the secretary, as i stated before, because the secretary has 16 direct reports. the census director currently reports to the undersecretary for economic affairs who had e.s.a. it is the role of e.s.a. to coordinate economic data, some
3:42 pm
of which is provided to the census bureau's economic director. granting the census bureau autonomy from e.s.a. will hinder the coordination of economic data. and certainly we are a world leader in terms of our regard for economic data. the census bureau wants to operate as independently as possible. that's understandable. but it's also important to recognize a history of cost overruns that the bureau has had under democrat and republican administrations. and the g.a.o. has put the 2010 census at its high risk list due to concerns of mismanagement within the census bureau. that was a bipartisan problem. congress should not reward fiscal irresponsibility by granting additional autonomy. madam speaker, this bill does not establish accountability. it does not require the census bureau to have an inspector
3:43 pm
general, which i think would be proper. it does not establish fiscal constraints. it doesn't even provide guidelines on the questions and surveys that it can ask the american people. and it doesn't require the bureau to produce alternative methods of procuring statistical data such as partnerships with universities and the private sector, which i think is necessary and proper in this time that we're in. madam speaker, consideration of this bill is premature. the 2010 census results will be released one week from today. the bureau just announced that yesterday. but crucial information concerning the statistical confidence level of the data will not be released until early next year. again, this bill is premature. i certainly appreciate my colleagues' interest in this, but i think it is better handled in the next congress where we can actually have an honest to goodness, i don't know, legislative hearing perhaps, maybe even a markup of a bill,
3:44 pm
and actually get some input from both sides. just because the senate passed it doesn't mean the house should rubber stamp it by any means but i do think we should have serious consideration of this bill and do it under the light of day, not at the 11th hour of a dying congress. so, that's my view and i think that's the view of many colleagues on my side of the aisle as well and i retain the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlelady from new york is recognized. mrs. maloney: thank you, madam speaker. i appreciate the gentleman's statements and as he knows, this is an issue that many of us on a bipartisan way have worked on for many years. as you know, my original bill did create an independent office of the census which by definition would have had an i.g. but at the protest of some of my colleagues and some in the commerce department we kept it in the commerce department.
3:45 pm
but with independents so that the census director could speak honesty and truth. i don't think any of us want to keep someone from not testifying in an honest and truthful way and having their words possibly changed by someone else. i'd like to ask unanimous consent to place in the record a series of editorials in support of this bill, "usa today" and many others. there have been hearings on this, including one in the joint economic committee, where seven former census directors in a bipartisan way testified in support of this bill. i ask unanimous consent to place into the record the testimony of dr. bryant, a republican census director and other republican census directors, along with dr. pruett and others, their testimony on how we can get a more reliable, transparent, useable census for accuracy for the american people.
3:46 pm
i now would like to recognize a very outstanding -- the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mrs. maloney: a woman on the committee, congresswoman norton. as much time as she may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from washington, d.c., is recollect. -- recognized. ms. norton: i want to thank the gentlelady from new york, mrs. maloney, for her initiative in seeing a problem and seeing to it that we dealt with this problem while we've got a hand on it. actually, it's very timely. the census is about to come out for the past 10 years december 30, and i can -- i can tell you , madam speaker, as a member of the subcommittee with jurisdiction over the census that the census had been controversial throughout my service in the congress. time and again we've seen before this committee. but the census should never be
3:47 pm
controversial. neither should a bill that fixes much what is wrong with the census in a systemic way and passed the other body, which doesn't pass much these days. it comes -- when it comes to the constitutionally required census, there really is only one way to act and that is preventively. i just want to say to the house that the handwriting is on the proverbial congressional wall. i mean, we were shocked that only a couple of years ago there was a serious and very expensive design change in the census so close to when the census itself was wrapping up. now, somebody should have seen this coming.
3:48 pm
certainly before our committee found out and was left with no choice. remember, this is the constitutionally required census. no choice but to accept the choice of the added cost. as our friends are interested in reducing costs, the weight of it begins with this bill which should be a consensus bill right now. the crisis has been the part of every census in modern times, yet, most of what congress does, if you think about it, is not required. our appropriations bills, department of defense, but the census is constitutionally required. it should not be buried. the census and those who are responsible for the census should not be buried in an
3:49 pm
agency bureaucracy direct reporting to the secretary, not taking the census bureau from outside the jurisdiction of the secretary but direct reporting to the secretary of commerce and complete independence with a five-year term is what this bill is after. the bill also contains urgently needed management reforms. it should be a top priority of this congress as it faces a new census to go home and be able to tell people we have acted this time ahead of the next census to make that census less controversial than censuses since the dicennial census has been in the lifetime of us, the care that's gone into this bill
3:50 pm
before our subcommittee and committee should be enough to say to the congress this afternoon the time has come to fix the dicennial census once and for all. i thank the gentlelady for yielding. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. mchenry: thank you, madam speaker. again, i rise in opposition to this legislation. certainly appreciate the sponsor's thoughtfulness in creating it, but i think there are a number of provisions that do cause problems. i agree with the democrat secretary of commerce, the current secretary of commerce with his opposition to large provisions within it in order to thoughtfully legislate on the disenial census. i think we need to have a hearing and i think we need to have a markup and i think we can hash this out. i am willing to work with my colleague from new york to have
3:51 pm
that happen in the next congress. i think she comes from a sincere place with this legislation. unfortunately, it's a piece of flawed legislation. i'll give you one example. the census director will report directly to the secretary of commerce. again, that census director will be one of 17 individuals with a direct report to the secretary of commerce. however, the secretary of commerce is not able to fire the census director. so if he's a direct report, he or she is a direct report to the commerce secretary, shouldn't the commerce secretary have the ability to fire that person if they're incompetent or inept rather than letting them serve a five-year term? that is one piece in the legislation that i think is troublesome. additionally, as the sponsor mentioned, there is no inspector general. and with a multibillion dollar census, i think it's important
3:52 pm
that we have i.g.'s that actually have the power to oversee a program and a program that's so large and so expensive. this census has a $3 billion cost overrun over its life cycle. now, the individuals responsible for that weren't held accountable, but that $3 billion, rather than rewarding the bureau for having a cost overrun of that size by giving them independence and autonomy right now, i think we need to have consideration to make sure we don't have future cost overruns over that. with that i retain the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady from new york is recognized. mrs. maloney: i grant myself as much time as i may consume. i thank the gentleman for his concern and his thoughtful statements. if the gentleman is so determined for a markup, there is one bill that the republican leadership has told us they must have and that's the tax bill.
3:53 pm
yet, there's been no markup on that tax bill or a hearing on that tax bill. and there have been hearings and discussions on this, and i have testimony from numerous republican census directors supporting it. now, as the gentleman knows -- and we changed the bill in response. it was an independent agency with an independent i.g. we folded it back. as you know, the commerce department has an i.g. they have their own i.g. if the gentleman in the next congress would like to sponsor an amendment to add another i.g. at commerce that looks at the census bureau, then i would certainly like to support the gentleman. now, the gentleman has writ an op-ed which i found very interesting, and i appreciate your op-ed that appeared in "politico." you called for many things in this bill, transparency,
3:54 pm
independent voice, accountability, and i repeat, because i know cost is an important factor now. this will cost no additional money to the taxpayer, not one additional cent. i'd like to join my good friend and colleague in the spirit of bipartisanship and the dedication of getting an accurate census to the american people that we pass this bill. and what the gentleman would like to add to it in the next congress, and the gentleman's party is in charge and you'll have the votes to add whatever you like next year, and i'd certainly like to work with you in a bipartisan way to add the gentleman's concerns. but there's absolutely no reason not to act on this when seven former census directors have come out strongly for it, including every republican census director under former president nixon, under former president ford, under former
3:55 pm
president reagan and george bush 41 and 43. george bush jr. -- g.w. and his father. so all of their census directors have come out in support of it. i would like to place in the record if i could have unanimous consent the national leadership conference on civil rights, and they represent 200 different civil rights organizations all in support of this bill. the national association of latino elected and appointed officials. their letter in support of the bill. the population association of america and the association of population centers, their letter of support for the bill. the american association for public opinion research, their statement in support of the bill. the american planning association, their statement in support of the bill.
3:56 pm
the american statistical association that are dedicated to accurate numbers, their strong, strong support of accuracy in this bill. the consortium of social science associations, their support. their latino census network, their strong support. the mid region council of governments, their strong letter of support. and the national institute for latino policy, their letter of support. the southeast michigan census council, their support of the bill. and the southern demographic association, their support of the bill. so as my good friend and colleague knows that there is strong support for this bill, many allege that the commerce's opposition is just a turf battle. well, the census is too important for a turf battle. i'd support the gentleman's
3:57 pm
amendment to have an independent extra i.g. -- if he wants two or three or four or five, i'd support the gentleman's extra oversight of what the census bureau is doing. but mainly we want them to be given the tools to get the job done. that is what this bill does. madam speaker, i have no additional speakers. a number of members have indicated because of the weather they are late in getting here. they will be putting their statements of support into the record. i reserve the balance of my time. i yield back to you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. mchenry: thank you, madam speaker. i ask unanimous consent to submit a record for my -- submit a statement to the record from my colleague, charlie dent from pennsylvania. the speaker pro tempore: without objection.
3:58 pm
mr. mchenry: madam speaker, just to address my colleague's comments about the opinions she imputed to me about this legislation, the way she changed the legislation to more meet with my opinion, those, madam speaker, were not my opinions. we've actually not had discussions about this legislation, my colleague and i from new york have not. so just to be very clear, those opinions were someone else's, not mine. additionally, it's kind of interesting to throw in the tax debate regarding a piece of legislation about the census. i'm not going to take the bait. it's fine. we will have a vote on that or not have a vote on it this congress depending on what the speaker thinks. i certainly understand the concern about not having hearings and not having markups. but i would say to my colleague from new york that it is her party that is in charge of both the house and the senate and they had every opportunity to
3:59 pm
schedule a hearing on this piece of legislation, they had every opportunity to schedule a markup on this peaks of legislation and -- piece of legislation and they didn't. so clearly it is a problem not with my party but it is a problem with my colleague from new york's party about getting it scheduled. madam speaker, i do have serious concerns and i think legitimate concerns and i understand how many folks would operate in congress which is you take a pledge to fix it later and that later never happens. what i would say to my colleague from new york nrkts next congress i would be very happy to work with her to pass a reasonable piece of legislation that i think structurally will look different than this but i think will take on some of the concerns that she has about the census bureau. i'm truly concerned about making sure that our statistical agencies are independent, independent from political
4:00 pm
influence like this president tried to have at the beginning of his term in office, by having the census director report directly to then chief of staff rahm emanuel. we came out opposed to that, it was my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that wanted that. we came out opposed to statistical manipulation of the outcome of the census, which some in the other party were very much in favor of. it is true that we have political disagreements between republicans and democrats. i think we all want to have a fair and accurate census. i also want to have a census that's cheaper in the future than it has been in the past. we've had a cost overrun of $3 billion. and as i would mention to my colleague from new york, the department of commerce, their whole budget is just shy of $9 billion annually. they had a $3 billion cost overrun within just the census. so that is an enor muss sum and
4:01 pm
i think it's worthy of -- enormous sum and i think it's worthy of having an inspector general to make sure this doesn't happen again. that's my concern. with that i retain the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlelady from new york is recognized. mrs. maloney: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to place in the record the statement of the chairman of the oversight and government reform committee, congressman ed towns. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mrs. maloney: well, i appreciate the gentleman's concerns but we should pass this bill and in the new congress you could add your amendments or your ideas to the underlying bill. this is a strong bill with no cost to american taxpayers. no increased cost. and it will help ensure a better census for 2010. as i said, it has very strong bipartisan support, particularly the seven living former census directors who served republicans
4:02 pm
and democratic presidents. they support this bill, they testified before congress that this bill would make a stronger, more accountable, transparent census. the former directors support an advocacy on behalf of this bill i believe underscores the importance of the reforms needed to ensure that the census bureau is able to best perform its constitutional mandate of providing a fair and accurate census account and again i want to underscore, how many times have we seen a bill come over with 100 senators in support of it? totally unanimous, totally bipartisan. and i'm confident that this bill will ensure that congress will get the information that -- the speaker pro tempore: the time has expired. mrs. maloney: need and deserve to get us a fairly and fully funded census, no matter who
4:03 pm
occupies the white house -- the speaker pro tempore: time has expired. mrs. maloney: oh, my time is up. i was just getting started. in other words, this is a very important bill, i would like to place in the record all of those who have endorsed it and i urge a bipartisan strong vote in support of this bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. mchenry: thank you, madam speaker. i'm sorry my colleague used up her time but i'm going to close in saying that anyone that wants an accountable census bureau will oppose this bill. instead of saying we want an independent bureau that is not accountable, i think we're saying we want an independent bureau that is accountable and that's why i'm going to oppose this bill. i ask my colleagues, those that want fiscal sanity, those that want proper oversight of the census, those that want reasonable legislating that actually means that we have a hearing and a markup to vote no
4:04 pm
on this bill. i'd also mention to my colleague from new york that her legislation that we're discussing today got as many votes as that tax deal that she opposes. so, you know, you can take this for all you want on what the senate does, but i think us here in the house, the census affects every member of the house, all of our constituents, our statistical reporting agencies, our economic bureaus as well. we want to make sure we get this legislation right and it is highly flawed as it currently is constructed and it will mean further cost overruns going forward and with that i urge my colleagues to vote no and i reject this legislation and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass senate 3167. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3
4:05 pm
of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection -- mr. mchenry: madam speaker, i ask for the yeas and nays. madam speaker, i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. rsuanto clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. the chair lays before the house the following communications. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives, madam, pursuant to the permission granted in clause 2-h of rule 2 of the rules of the u.s. house of representatives, the clerk
4:06 pm
received the following message from the secretary of the senate on december 14, 2010, at 1:12 p.m. that the senate passed senate 2902, that the senate passed with an amendment h.r. 628, that the senate passed without amendment h.r. 6278, that the senate passed senate 3447. with best wishes i am, signed sincerely, lorraine c. miller, clerk of the house. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i move that the house suspend the rules and agree to the senate bill, 3984. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: senate 3984, an act to amend and extend the museum and library services act and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from arizona, mr. grijalva, and the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. petri, will each
4:07 pm
control 20 minutes. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from arizona. mr. grijalva: thank you, mr. speaker. i request five legislative days during which members may revise and extend and insert extraneous material on the senate bill, 3984, into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. grijalva: i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. grijalva: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in support of senate bill 3984, which re-authorizes the museum and library services act. this bipartisan bill updates the mlsa to better reflect the role that libraries and museums play in our nation's communities and ensures preservation of collections for future generations. our nation's libraries serve as an important role in providing our communities with free access to all types of information and telecommunications services. during these difficult economic
4:08 pm
times, libraries are a life line to many with -- without home access to a computer or internet to search for employment, conduct research or access training resources. according to the american library association, 2/3 of our nation's libraries report that they provide the only free access to computers and the internet in their communities. within the last two years, libraries have experienced significant increases in demand for services, including helping patrons complete online job applications, complete resumes and access job databases. this bill will enable libraries to continue providing these critical services to the american people. the senate bill will also help the institute of museum and library services to encourage more collections between agencies and programs to promote family literacy, technology education and work force development. these efforts will help libraries fully leverage their
4:09 pm
role as resource facilities and community centers. additionally this re-authorization enhances current training opportunities for professionals and supports the development of a diverse work force capable of meeting the 21st century information needs of our communities. our nation's museums are also ina critical part of our country's educational and economic infrastructure. stimulating tourism and partnering with schools to support the local curriculum. according to the american association of museums, these centers of discovery and learning employ as many as half a million americans nationwide. and contribute approximately $20.7 billion to the american economy each year. museums attract 850 million visits per year, and an additional 542 million via the internet. museums also include aquariums, botanical gardens, nature centers and zoos.
4:10 pm
over 175 million people visited accredited zoos and aquariums annually and these institutions generate $8.4 billion in annual u.s. economy activity. zoos and aquariums provide millions of children with their only firsthand experiences with with the support of the private funds, the foundation will make a strategic grant and increase public awareness of federal policies and programs to improve physical finance and nutrition. to oversee such activities, the foundation will be governed by a bipartisan 11-member board of directors. establishing this independent foundation will contribute to our national efforts to end childhood obesity and improve child nutrition. yesterday the president signed the healthy, hunger-free quids act to improve children's access to nutritious meals and enhance the quality of meals they eat in and out of school.
4:11 pm
additionally, the first lady's let's move campaign set a goal of ending childhood obesity in a generation. this movement engages every sect oror of our society and impacts the health of children. it seeks to provide schools, families and communities the simple tools they need to help kids be more active, eat better and be more health arey. i adds to these efforts by enhancing the tools available to improve the health and well being of our children. i want to thank the sponsor of the senate bill, senator warner of virginia, and the sponsor of its companion legislation in the house, representative john sarbanes of maryland, for their leadership in bringing this important legislation to the floor. i also want to thank chairman waxman of energy and commerce committee for working with education and labor committee to allow this bill to move quickly todd floor. i ask unanimous consent that an exchange of letters dated december 14, 2010, between
4:12 pm
chairman waxman and chairman miller be included in the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. grijalva: i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation to begin a national foundation on sports and nutrition andry serve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. petri: i yield myself such time as i may consume. this legislation would establish a charitable and nonprofit foundation to raise private funds to carry out new initiatives by the president's down soinl finance, sports and nutrition. the bill establishes a board of directors to govern the activities of the foundation oy pointed by the speaker, the majority leader of the house and senate and the minority leader of the house and senate. first established in 1965, the
4:13 pm
president's council on finance, sports and nutrition has been renewed by every president for the last 45 years. council is made up of 25 volunteer citizens, including new orleans saints quarterback and super bowl xliv m.v.p. drew brees, three-time olympic gymnast dominick daust, billie jean king, grant hill and michelle kwan. the council advises the president and secretary of health and human services on ways to develop successful and affordable sports and nutrition programs for all americans regardless of age, background, or ability. council has played an important role over the years in raising the awareness of americans about the immediate to become physically active. sponsor -- it sponsors an array of programs, events and initiatives, including the establishment of may as national
4:14 pm
physical finance and sports month, runs the president's physical finance award, recognizes local contributions to physical activities and played a pivotal role in developing dietary guidelines and the national physical activity plan. currently the president ice council on finance, sports and nutrition lacks any grant making or regulatory authority which has limited its activities to provide in consultation and technical assistance, general publications a website and guidance to schools and government agencies and other interested parties on how to improve physical activity. the bill before us, s. 1235, would establish a a charitable and nonprofit foundation to raise private funds so that the council can award grant to carry out and support its activities. the foundation is similar to those established by the national institute of health and center for disease control. foundations created by congress
4:15 pm
allowed these to create cooperation with private sector and others. the bill prohibits the foundation from accepting or competing for any federal funds. it's been stated on this floor in the pastings childhood and adult obesity is an issue that's reached epidemic proportions in the united states. 2008, 17% of children between the ages of 2 and 19 were oobese. and approximately 70% to 80% of overweight or obese children remain obese in adulthood. these children are more likely to develop diseases such as high blood pressure and type ii die bee trees. in order to reverse these dangerous trends, americans need information and support to improve their diet and promote exercise in their daily lives. the bill will establish the
4:16 pm
president's council of physical financed on sports and nutrition and assure it continues to play an important role in the obesity crisis that's negatively impacting the health of all americans. i would like to mention the contribution of our former colleague from maryland, tom mcmillan, in urging that we attend to this important matter before the end of this congress and urge my colleagues to join me in doing so and with that, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin yields back his time. the gentleman from arizona. mr. grijalva: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm pleased to recognize the gentleman from maryland, the sponsor of the companion legislation in the house, mr. sarbanes of maryland. the speaker pro tempore: i'm pleased to recognize the gentleman from maryland. mr. sarbanes: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i rise in strong support, it's a privilege to rise today in support of s. 1275 and its
4:17 pm
companion, h.r. 4322, which is an act to create the national foundation on finance, sports, and nutrition, which is designed to support the president's council on finance, sports, and nutrition. i want to thank the many co-sponsors of this legislation, it's a bipartisan bill, we have strong support from both republicans and democrats and have done all the way through this process. i want to thank congressman george miller for his efforts in moving this from the education and labor committee and i want to salute his staff for working so closely with us. of course senator mark warner, who is the sponsor on the senate side of this legislation, i too want to salute congressman -- former congressman tom mcmillan who has been just a tireless advocate for establishing this foundation which can support the mission of the president's council on youth finance, sports, and nutrition. this council was first
4:18 pm
established, as has been indicated a couple of times, by president eisenhower back in 1956. who understood we needed to create a focus here at the federal level on the issue of healthy lifestyles, on finance, on physical activity, getting people outside into regular activity. and today, we have the council with the same mission, a very important mission, more important, i think, than ever before. you've heard the discussion about the increasing incidence of obesity among the next generation, the importance of encouraging regular physical activity, of paying attention to nutrition, i, myself, am very focused on research that shows that the average young person today spends about 7 1/2 hours a day on television, video games, internet, hand held electronic devices and about four minutes a
4:19 pm
day, that's minutes a day, outside in unstructured physical are recreation. that's a real changeover from the way things used to be. it mean we was to focus our young people on engaging in regular physical activity. there's a lot of attention to that. that's what the president's council on finance and sports and nutrition is all about. now as was mentioned, the federal dollars that are available to support the president's council are relatively limited. i think we can expect that that's going to be the case going forward. luckily, though, there are many people in the private sector, private citizens, others, who are ready to step forward and contribute to this effort because they understand how critically important the mission of the president's council is. so they're ready to do that. they're in fact very excited about the newly appointed commissioners to the president's council and the, i think, outpouring of support that that
4:20 pm
is going to generate and they're ready to step forward and help, unfortunately, up until now, up until the creation of this act, of this foundation, there hasn't really been a mechanism by which private parties could step forward and support the mission of the council. that's exactly what this legislation is designed to do. the foundation that is created by this bill makes it possible for the foundation on behalf of the president's council to solicit, receive and administer private contributions. so this is going to give people a chance to step forward and say, this mission is a critical one and we want to support it with our private dollars. this is a very accepted model, we've seen it work with the national parks service, with the national institutes of health, with the centers for disease control, and i think it's a wonderful opportunity to strengthen the council's mission going forward.
4:21 pm
for that reason, i urge support of this bill. i yield my time back. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland yields back. the gentleman from arizona controls the time. the gentleman from wisconsin has yielded back. mr. grijalva: i have no further speakers and for the record let me crect the principal sponsor in the senate, senator mark warner, i inadvertently said john warner, and i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: all time having expired, the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass senate 1275. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek
4:22 pm
recognition? mr. grijalva: thank you, mr. speaker. i move that the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 1759. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 1759. resolution expressing support for designation of january 23 as ed roberts day. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from arizona, mr. grijalva, and the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. petri, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from arizona. mr. grijalva: thank you, mr. speaker. i request five legislative days in which members may revise and extend and insert extraneous material on the house resolution before us into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. grijalva: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona is are recognized. mr. grijalva: i rise today in support of house resolution 1759, which supports the establishment of ed roberts day. mr. edward burn roberts was a
4:23 pm
pioneering leader and champion of the -- in the disabilities rights movement. mr. robert was born january 23, 1939, in san mateo, california. he acquired pole yow at the age of 14, in 1953. two years before the salk vaccine put an end to that epidemic. after 18 months in the hospital, he returned home, paralyzed from the neck down except for a few fingers and toes. roberts continued his high school education while spending vast amounts of time resting and sleeping in the iron lung. when a high school administrator threatened to deny him a diploma because he had not completed drivers and physical education requirements he protested and began an early career of activism. later, roberts became the first student with severe disabilities to attend the university of california at berkley.
4:24 pm
other students with significant disabilities joined roberts in an empty wing in which the university had placed him and over the next few years began to call themselves the rolling quads. they began advocating for curb cuts, opening access to wider community and creating a first student-led disability program at any university in the nation. that student program led to the creation of the nation's first center for independent living. and roberts assumed leadership of the center and guided its development as a model for disability advocacy and self-help service. after earning a bachelor's degree and a master's degree in political science at u.c.-birkly, in 1975 roberts was appointed the director of the california department of rehabilitation. in 1983 he co-founded the world institute and disability, an organization committed to eliminating barriers to full social integration for persons
4:25 pm
with disabilities. mr. edwards -- mr. roberts died of national causes in 1995. leaving behind a legacy as the modern father of the disabilities rights movement. robert's efforts helped to reduce barriers, increase access and improve the lives for persons with disabilities across this nation and world. it is with these contributions in mind that this resolution calls for the establishment of ed roberts day. mr. speaker, i want to thank the sponsor of the resolution and chairman of the house education and labor committee, mr. george miller, for his leadership in bringing this important resolution to the floor. i urge my colleagues to join me in support of the house resolution 1759 which supports the designation of an ed roberts day and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona reserves his time. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. petri: mr. speaker, i yield
4:26 pm
myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. petri: i rise in support of house resolution 1759 which supports the designation of an ed roberts day. for his tireless work as a leader and champion in the disability rights community. born january 23, 1939, edward burn roberts contracted polio in 1953. despite spending most of his adolescents in an iron lung, he grad high school and was admitted to a college where he became the first severely disabled person to attend that university. this is more amazing when you consider the obstacles that were thrown in ed's way. a high school administrator threatened to deny him a diploma because he had not completed driver's education and physical education requirementless. college administrators told him they had tried to educate students with disabilities before and it did not work. the director of campus housing
4:27 pm
was afraid that they could not accommodate thinks heed -- his needs, offering him a room in the hospital. ed accepted only on the condition that it was considered dormitory space. during his time at uc-berkley and after he left college, he worked with students with disabilities to push for curb cuts so parts of the university could be accessible to the disables persons. he formed the physical disabilities student program to help facilitate and ease the transition for other students with disabilities to attend college. in 1972 he established the first center for independent living in order to support and assist disabled persons in gaining independence. the centers was and continues to be based on three main points. first, comprehensive programs with a wide variety of services such as employment in assistive technology, are the most effective at meeting the needs of persons with disabilities.
4:28 pm
second, people with disabilities knoll best how to meet the needs of others with disabilities. and third, the strongest and most vibrant communities are those that include and embrace all people including disabled persons. today most independent living centers across the country use this model as a basis for their work with individuals with disabilities. to celebrate this fact, ed is known as the father of the independent living movement. mr. speaker, ed roberts was a pioneer in the disability community until his death in 1995. today we honor him and acknowledge his work to reduce barriers, increase access and improve the lives of all persons with disabilities. so i rise in support of house resolution 1759 which supports the designation of an ed roberts day and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the
4:29 pm
gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from arizona. mr. grijalva: mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time. all time having expired, the question is will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 1759. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the resolution is agreed to and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. the gentleman from arizona. mr. grijalva: on this resolution, i elect to ask for the yeas and nays, sir. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from the district of columbia seek recognition?
4:30 pm
ms. norton: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill, h.r. 6510. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 6510, a bill to direct the administrator of general services to convey a parcel of real property in houston, texas, to the military museum of texas and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from the district of columbia, ms. norton, and the gentleman from alaska, mr. young, will each control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. ms. norton: i ask the speaker to pause a moment.
4:31 pm
ms. norton: may i proceed, mr. speaker? the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized and it will be the gentleman from florida, mr. diaz-balart, who will control the other side. the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. ms. norton: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous remarks -- material on h.r. 6510. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. norton: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. norton: h.r. 6510 directs the administrator of general services to convey a parcel of
4:32 pm
real property in houston, texas, to the military museum of texas. the military museum of texas is a nonprofit 501-c-3 based in harris county, texas, that was created to honor the contributions of the citizens of texas to the armed services of the united states. the museum was founded in 1992 as a charitable organization and has an all-volunteer staff with an annual operating budget. the military museum of texas's main activities include educating citizens on texas military and history and preserving military memorabilia. the memorabilia include artillery field pieces, field equipment, etc. but primarily military vehicles for display that are shared with the public. it's income is derivinged directly from the sale of items to the general public.
4:33 pm
membership dues, event fees and contributions of private individuals and corporations. the museum devotes a significant portion of its funds to its military vehicle restoration program, that these vehicles are often shared with the public on site and at local parades. the military museum of texas estimates the value of its military vehicles, the military memorabilia collection and its inventory of $10 million. the museum is currently housed in approximately 20,000 square feet owned by the general services administration. originally t.s.a. leased facility to the state of texas, starting in the early 1970's. before the museum took control of the facility in the late 2004
4:34 pm
under lease with the state of texas for nominal rent plus utilities and minor repairs. since its initial occupancy, the military museum has worked with the private consultant to put together a five-year capital improvement plan for f.y. 2010 through f.y. 2015 to improve the facility and address storm damage to make the museum more of a world class museum. the general services administration declared the property excess december 16, 2009, and the military museum of texas has expressed an interest in purchasing the property at its full market value. with a museum use restriction. the government interest in this property is protected because if the site is used for anything except for museums during the
4:35 pm
next 30 years the owners will be required to pay the market value of the parcel at the highest and best use. given that the g.s.a. has declared this property excess and the military museum of texas is willing to purchase at market value, we find this transfer to be in the best interest of the government. i urge my colleagues to support the bill. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from florida. mr. diaz-balart: thank you, mr. speaker. i would yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. diaz-balart: thank you. let me add my words to the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. this bill would direct the g.s.a. to transfer property in houston to the military museum, as the gentlewoman just said. i want to first, though, thank the gentlewoman from texas,
4:36 pm
sheila jackson lee, for bringing up this bill. this would -- as well as what the chairwoman just talked about, it would also frankly resolve an issue that is really an unfortunate symptom of frankly poor management in real federal property. the museum leased this property in good faith from the state of texas which had used the property since 1972. and the state had actually even made improvements on it. at the time, g.s.a. didn't even know that it owned this property. so it was only after due diligence from the folks at the museum, when they started researching the property and the tax records, that's when it was discovered that g.s.a. actually owned, well, let me say, likely owned the property. g.s.a. doesn't even have a record, didn't have a record of its ownership interest. but subsequently it confirmed its interest in the property.
4:37 pm
now, the chairwoman and ranking member john mica of the transportation and infrastructure committee and i have been working to cut wasteful management of federal real estate property and to save taxpayer dollars -- taxpayers money. unfortunately this is yet another example, mr. speaker, of the type of poor management that has frankly plagued the federal real property. this case raises serious questions as to whether federal agencies frankly even have accurate data about which properties they even own. the taxpayer even owns, let alone how to manage those properties. but now we are where we are and that's why i thank the gentlewoman from texas. the military museum of texas which is a nonproperty organization founded in 1992 by military veterans, it operates with a volunteer staff and displays military vehicles, as we've heard, and they frankly draw significant. a visitors each year. so the g.s.a., after finally realizing that they did own the property, that the taxpayers
4:38 pm
owned the property, has determined that there's no federal use for this property. so this bill would provide an opportunity, i think a very good opportunity, for the military museum of texas to continue using the property as a museum. it will ensure that the taxpayers will be compensated appropriately. i'm pleased to be a co-sponsor of the gentlewoman from texas, i want to thank her again for her leadership on this issue and i clearly support the bill. i just wanted to make sure that everybody understood the issue that we're dealing with here at the federal level. when you have an agency that doesn't even know that it owns a piece of property, it tells you that we have an issue up here that we need to deal with. with that, mr. speaker, i would reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida reserves his time. the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. ms. norton: i am pleased to give to the gentlelady from texas, the sponsor of this bill, i yield to the gentlelady such time as she may consume.
4:39 pm
the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from texas is recognized. ms. jackson lee: thank you, mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house and submit a statement into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. jackson lee: let me thank the chairwoman of the subcommittee for her kind generosity and the excellent staff of the chairperson and as well my friend, my good friend from florida, congressman mario diaz-balart, the ranking member of this committee for their wisdom and for their staff's excellent work that has generated relief for hardworking veterans. one says the texas military museum, it speaks to individual who was found thems now living in the state of texas, for these are heroes that served the nation, proudly so. and they welcome the nation to
4:40 pm
come and to celebrate the idea of a military museum. i don't think we can have enough of these facilities. i'm very grateful that this nonprofit institution in the wisdom of my bipartisan co-sponsors of which i want to express a deep and abiding appreciation, as i indicated to the ranking member for his sponsorship and to the chairwoman for her leadership, because it is preservinging the honor and memory of citizens who served defending the united states' freedom and liberty and as well, we emphasize, serving the entire country. this will include all branches of the armed forces, including the reserves and the national guard. this will allow these individuals who have nurtured and cared for military vehicles and other equipment for display since the beginning of their
4:41 pm
operations critical components of the military history, these individuals, these soldiers have restored and preserved this equipment and memorabilia with enduring kindness, volunteerism, and they have stood fast just like they stood fast on the nation's battlefield on behalf of the nation. the museum has had to turn down historic military equipment for display and restoration, given their space limitations this museum will in essence be an asset for the american people. what will it do? in addition to saying thank you to veterans to those who have served, it will be a benefit to the community, schools, as well as veterans and military-related groups. it will teach the children to value a soldier, both old and young, both active and nonactive. it will teach them to understand what sacrifice is all about. it will explain to them these
4:42 pm
tough vehicles that children rarely see what they mean to their freedom. the military museum provides educational programming. you can't imagine the different schools eager to see this. live re-enactment from military personnel. exhibits provide military history and preservation as well as research database available for educational and historical institutions and the public. if i may deviate for just a moment a fallen hero all of us admired, ambassador richard holbrooke, took his arms of peace, he was the envoy to pakistan and afghanistan, where a war is raging in afghanistan. but what i would say to you is that he understood the partnership and the work that has to be done with the military. that's why this museum is so important. they work together for peace, diplomacy and peace. it is enormously important that
4:43 pm
we provide an opportunity for these to be recognized. now we are grateful that the general services administration has the light bulb on. we thank those who have recognized how important it is to be able to fix this, you will, that's what we're doing. but we're fixing it for the right reason. this will be conveyed for market value, the title, and interest to the benefit of the united states of america. and therefore this particular land will not go unused or misused, it will, in actuality be for the military museum of texas that could be really called the military museum, one of them, of the united states of america. we support honoring our soldiers. so let me thank ron kindle, eliot dumas, joanna hardy, major
4:44 pm
keith washington of my office, we thank him for his fine work and my deputy chief of staff for her untiring efforts to keep moving this bill. certainly we want to acknowledge all the sponsors that were the original co-sponsors, mario diaz-balart, ted poe, ileana ros-lehtinen, henry "hank" johnson and many, many others have rallied around to be supportive. let me close at this time and indicate that we often speak of making sure that our veterans have all their benefits, we want to help the wounded warriors, many of us visit the front lines from iraq, afghanistan, to bosnia, and places beyond. but we want them to know that we cherish what they have done and a military museum is a way of doing that. it gaves them -- gives them great joy to teach and educate adults and children alike what
4:45 pm
it is to serb. sour freedom is intertwined with the sacrifices of our men and women whose devotion to freedom is unparalleled. i'm privileged to honor their sacrifices and the role each plays in our freedom by championing and supporting this legislation. this bill is yet another reminder to all americans of the risk that our service men and women take on our behalf daily. moreover, h.r. 6510 is an expression of gratitude for their service. the military museum of texas houses, as i indicated, these wonderful memorabilia and artifacts and i can say the relics remind us to be grateful and thankful for the reasons for the debt owed to military service men and women for the sacrifices they made for our enjoyment of freedom. i ask my colleagues to help us make it right and i ask my colleagues to support h.r. 6510, a bipartisan bill recognizing the history of our great military men and women. i yield back.
4:46 pm
the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the chair will receive a message. the messenger: mr. speaker a message from the speaker. the secretary: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: madam secretary. the secretary: i haven directed by the senate to inform the house the nat has passed with amendment an bill to enhance joanna's law with respect to gynecologic cancers in which the concurrence of the house is requested. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida. mr. thrart: thank you, mr. speaker. let me thank the gentlelady from texas for bringing up this bill. as i mentioned before, not only is it going to help solve a problem where you had a federal agency that didn't know it had a piece of property but as she eloquently stated a little while ago, it's solving that problem and replacing it with a very meritorious thing, a museum for
4:47 pm
our fighting men and women with who keep us free and have kept us free for over 200 years. again, i want to thank her. she very generously mentioned lots of names that she thanked. but i think i would be remiss if i didn't thank the gentlewoman from texas for her leadership on this issue. i know it may have been a frustrating issue at times. but she has brought it to the finish line here in the house. also, i want to thank the chairwoman of the subcommittee that i've had the privilege of being the ranking member of for the last two years. first, for working so closely together with me and for once again bringing this bill but also just for being a great partner for the last two years, working together on a number of issues, always with great generosity and a spirit of cooperation with me and that's something that i will never forget. as you know this may or may not be the last time i'm on the
4:48 pm
floor as a member of this committee. because i'm moving on to the appropriations committee. but i did not want to let this time go by without thanking the chairwoman for her many courtesies to me and i have really enjoyed, it's been a privilege working with you, madam chairwoman, and with that, mr. speaker, i now yield back the remaining part of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida yields back. the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. ms. norton: i want to thank the ranking member, mr. diaz-balart, with whom i've work sod well and so closely and to thank him for the collegiality he and i have had on the subcommittee, it's a model, it seems to me, for how the congress might want to follow. i must say that when my good friend tells me he will probably be leaving the committee
4:49 pm
altogether, it is a sad note for me, given the way we have tried to reach agreement whenever there has been disagreement and frankly on most matters, he and i have found little upon which to disagree. i can only wish him well on the appropriations committee. that must be his preference. therefore i wish it for him as well. i certainly hope to have the opportunity to work with him again in connection with that committee or otherwise on this floor or in this congress. i want to congratulate my good friend from texas for her strong leadership and this bill -- in this bill and wanting to make sure this bill got on the floor before the end of the session and for her devotion to a bill that should be received, i'm sure, by all because of the
4:50 pm
recognition she so wisely understands all members on the armed forces are due. and with that, mr. speaker, i have no further speakers and i am prepared to yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from the district of columbia yields back her time. all time having expired, the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 6510. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended -- ms. norton: i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed.
4:51 pm
the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 6516, to make technical crecks to provisions of law enacted by the coast guard authorization act of 2010. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 6516 a bill to make technical corrections to provisions of law enacted by the coast guard authorization act of 2010. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from maryland, mr. cummings, and the gentleman from alaska, mr. young, will each
4:52 pm
control 20 minutes. the chair will now recognize the gentleman from maryland. mr. cummings: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days in which to are revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on h.r. 6516. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. cummings: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cummings: i rise in support of h.r. 6516 to make technical corrections to provisions of law enacted by the coast guard authorization act of 2010. the coast guard authorization act of 2010 is the first coast guard authorizing legislation to become law since 2006. this law represents years of hard work toward improving the services capabilities by addressing the following issues.
4:53 pm
oil pollution prevention, acquisition reform, port security, marine safety and the coast guard's organizational structure. this law also protects the public and our environment by prohibiting the sale, distribution, and use of toxic anti-pollution systems for ships and marine structures. i'm proud of the work of so many who contributed to this important piece of maritime legislation, however, after the bill was enacted, we identified a small number of technical drafting errors, h.r. 6516 corrects those minor errors, i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting h r. 6516 and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from alaska. mr. young: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the
4:54 pm
4:55 pm
4:56 pm
4:57 pm
4:58 pm
4:59 pm
left
right

38 Views

disc Borrow a DVD of this show
info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on